3 ms·

> It may help you to ponder that in the 1980s, a lot of people were extremely confident human civilization was doomed, doomed, doomed by certainly no later than

> It may help you to ponder that in the 1980s, a lot of people were extremely confident human civilization was doomed, doomed, doomed by certainly no later than 2000, and even setting the date that late was terribly optimistic. I imagine a lot of people thought things were going to be fine too as the Roman Empire collapsed. Or at the start of the Dark Ages. Or when the Black Plague began. Or when the 1929 market crash that kicked off the Great Depression. Or on the eve of both of the World Wars. The point being: yes, most of the time, humanity muddles its way through its crises successfully. Until one day, it doesn't...

duncan_bayne 10y ago
We muddled our way through those crises, too, just with a lot of pain at the time. In the distant future those will looks like minor setbacks in the glorious development of humankind.
yxhuvud 10y ago
Of those, I would only classify the plague and the wars as some sort of crisis for humanity. For example, the fall of Rome did not involve a decrease of average living standards. Rather it is the opposite that is the case as it happened at roughly the same time as the abolition of slavery in Europe. You should not conflate crises that affect only the ruling classes with crises for humanity.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  What are you talking about? The fall of Rome involved the loss of a huge amount of technology and learning, as people abandoned the idea of specialization of labor and cities so they could go work as serfs in the fields for feudal lords. For the citizens of Rome (not just the ruling classes), it was absolutely a large decrease in living standards, and in overall civilization. There's a reason the period following is called "the Dark Ages": there was very little education any more, and no one wrote anything down like they used to, so that period is largely a mystery (relative to how much we know about the Roman times). It took 1000 years for western civilization to get anywhere near the level of civilization that Rome had developed. Now you're right that it wasn't exactly a "crisis for humanity" because it only affected one part of the world--western Europe (the eastern Roman Empire continued), and also didn't involve a massive die-off, just a regression of civilization in that one area.

duncan_bayne 10y ago

We muddled our way through those crises, too, just with a lot of pain at the time. In the distant future those will looks like minor setbacks in the glorious development of humankind.

yxhuvud 10y ago

Of those, I would only classify the plague and the wars as some sort of crisis for humanity. For example, the fall of Rome did not involve a decrease of average living standards. Rather it is the opposite that is the case as it happened at roughly the same time as the abolition of slavery in Europe. You should not conflate crises that affect only the ruling classes with crises for humanity.

Arizhel 10y ago
What are you talking about? The fall of Rome involved the loss of a huge amount of technology and learning, as people abandoned the idea of specialization of labor and cities so they could go work as serfs in the fields for feudal lords. For the citizens of Rome (not just the ruling classes), it was absolutely a large decrease in living standards, and in overall civilization. There's a reason the period following is called "the Dark Ages": there was very little education any more, and no one wrote anything down like they used to, so that period is largely a mystery (relative to how much we know about the Roman times). It took 1000 years for western civilization to get anywhere near the level of civilization that Rome had developed. Now you're right that it wasn't exactly a "crisis for humanity" because it only affected one part of the world--western Europe (the eastern Roman Empire continued), and also didn't involve a massive die-off, just a regression of civilization in that one area.