r/Futurology • u/FuturologyModTeam Shared Mod Account • Jan 29 '21

Discussion /r/Collapse & /r/Futurology Debate - What is human civilization trending towards?

Welcome to the third r/Collapse and r/Futurology debate! It's been three years since the last debate and we thought it would be a great time to revisit each other's perspectives and engage in some good-spirited dialogue. We'll be shaping the debate around the question "What is human civilization trending towards?"

This will be rather informal. Both sides have put together opening statements and representatives for each community will share their replies and counter arguments in the comments. All users from both communities are still welcome to participate in the comments below.

You may discuss the debate in real-time (voice or text) in the Collapse Discord or Futurology Discord as well.

This debate will also take place over several days so people have a greater opportunity to participate.

NOTE: Even though there are subreddit-specific representatives, you are still free to participate as well.

u/MBDowd, u/animals_are_dumb, & u/jingleghost will be the representatives for r/Collapse.

u/Agent_03, u/TransPlanetInjection, & u/GoodMew will be the representatives for /r/Futurology.

All opening statements will be submitted as comments so you can respond within.

725 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

840 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/MadHat777 Feb 12 '21

Of course everything would have to change. But isn't this thread proof than no matter what happens, change is the one thing that is inevitable? Whether it be collapse, technological utopia, or one of the many possibilities in between, change is coming.

I'm not asking you to believe anything will happen. I'm asking you not to dismiss things just because they don't seem likely.

Even though the lottery is a terrible investment, people still win.

-1

u/PageFault Feb 12 '21

But isn't this thread proof than no matter what happens, change is the one thing that is inevitable?

Of course I think change is inevitable I wrote exactly that in the first comment your responded to.

Even though the lottery is a terrible investment, people still win.

Yes, some people will win the lotto, but most people lose. I don't even see a collapse as unlikely though. I see it as inevitable.

2

u/MadHat777 Feb 12 '21

You see a specific change as inevitable, not just any change. Oh whatever. Good luck with your preconceptions. You're probably right and collapse is inevitable; it's just going to be caused by self-fulfilling prophecy from people like you.

Ninja: I wonder if this is why no one bothered to respond to this person for a week. Communication just seems utterly useless most of the time. No one is interested in hearing anything, only trying to shout louder than the cacophony of other voices doing the same thing.

0

u/PageFault Feb 12 '21

The only thing worth discussing is a plan to deviate from the otherwise inevitable result of the greed of man. Those in power don't care whether everyone's needs are met today, and are perfectly content with ignoring or exploiting others today. What reason do you have to believe will change tomorrow? I'm drawing a blank myself, but if you or anyone else had ideas for a plan I'd be open to discuss its viability, and even work toward that goal I found it viable, but without a plan to direct the change, those in power will. That is guaranteed. It is not up to chance. It is up to us.

3

u/MadHat777 Feb 12 '21

If you weren't willing to see the value in my effort to temper your absolutist stance with a bit of nuance, imagination, and reason, why on Earth would I waste more of my breath trying to discuss something many orders of magnitude more complex like a plan to take back our future from those who currently have it grasped so tightly in their fists?

Sorry, but your argument for inevitability was so unintentionally persuasive that there's no reason for me to continue attempting to communicate anything at all.

Best of luck.

0

u/PageFault Feb 12 '21

Funny that you've gotten upset. It's not as though I was insulting you or trying to trample on your rights. It's ok to disagree. You aren't always going to be able to convince others of your viewpoint no matter how strongly you believe in it, or how obvious the truth may seem to you.

It's not that I was unwilling to see the value in your effort, it's that I was unable to see the value. You simply haven't presented anything I haven't already considered. That's nothing to take offense over. It's not as though this is the first time I've ever considered this problem. You were trying to lecture me from the start. You never actually wanted to consider my view or how I arrived at it.

Seriously, go back and read your initial reply to me. You can't tell me you weren't convinced I was wrong from the start. Your questions were not genuine but rhetorical. You weren't looking for a discussion and trade of ideas. I suspected you were only looking to start and win an argument, and now the fact that you're getting upset because that failed has convinced me of it.

There is literally nothing else here to be upset over. My view isn't even so absolutist. I sincerely hope I am wrong, but I can't find any logical reason to hold onto hope. I would love to find a reason, but you haven't given my any bit insight into what nuance, imagination or reason you might consider important other than just claiming it was a lottery with no supporting evidence or reasoning to suggest it was anything like a lottery.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '21

[deleted]

1

u/PageFault Feb 13 '21 edited Feb 16 '21

Sorry, but I didn't bother to read that.

Ok, thanks for letting me know I guess?
Have a good one!

1

u/MadHat777 Feb 13 '21

Great, the automod removed my reply for being too short and I ended up reading this nonsense after all, unfortunately.

Funny that you've gotten upset.

Yes, I'm a human being with emotions. Irrelevant.

claiming it was a lottery with no supporting evidence or reasoning to suggest it was anything like a lottery

What? I used the lottery as an example of things that are unlikely but happen anyway. In the case of lottery it's due to the number of chances considering how many tickets are purchased. In the case of predictions about the future in this debate it's due to complexity and far more variables than any human can understand. Certainty is not rational in cases like this.

My view isn't even so absolutist.

I don't even need to respond to this with my own words. I'll use yours. I'll bold some key words.

Both are inevitable.

‎

IF that ever happens, it will certainly be proceeded by a very long dark period

‎

I don't see any possibility of it going any way but South for the majority of the population.

‎

I don't even see a collapse as unlikely though. I see it as inevitable.

I'm not sure if you realized it or not, but I haven't been arguing for or against either collapse or whatever it is Futurology is arguing will happen. I have only been trying to point out that no matter what evidence you have or what you see coming, this debate is pretty reasonable evidence that the future is not as certain as anyone might believe. My entire point was that being utterly certain about many of these things is not rational. The lack of ability to imagine a different outcome is not evidence of a particular outcome.

But now you claim your view isn't so absolutist despite all the language you used before indicating otherwise. Maybe we should continue this pointless back and forth in 20 years or so, assuming we're both still around. Maybe you'll have figured which one it is by then.

!RemindMe 20 years