4 ms·
To push the metaphor a bit further isn't humanity itself a kind of cancer of the earth?
by sunstone 6y ago
To push the metaphor a bit further isn't humanity itself a kind of cancer of the earth?
- agumonkey 6y agoIt may have become, but it wasn't until we figured the physics out.
- TeMPOraL 6y agoIt was already. We've been a rolling ecological disaster way before we figured out writing. We just went from place to place, leaving burned forests and extinct species behind. Grokking physics definitely accelerated this, but we have an opportunity ahead of us to stabilize. Not sure we'll be able to take it, though. Not with the systems of incentives that we have now.
- agumonkey 6y agoAt that scale it's not much more than other species can do. I remember an article of the effects of less wolves on the eco system (yellowstone?). The whole area became a swamp. What changed since is the scale at which human societies impacted the ecosystem.
- HenryKissinger 6y ago"I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet." - Agent Smith, The Matrix
- the_cramer 6y agoTo this day I don't see how this "revelation" had an impact on anything. It's certainly interesting and I think it's inherently true (we're based of the same biology) but it doesn't change anything. Agent Smith certainly was the most high-tech philosoph...
- cgriswald 6y agoThat remains to be seen: It’s possible we are the reproductive system.
- digitalsushi 6y agoThis is like a frame of reference thing. Your response is fascinating. It could spark hours and hours of debate. What an amazing response. If life is growth, the goal is to spread as far and wide as possible. Life will spread to Mars, the moon, and beyond. (Or die trying, and inevitably, literally). If life is balance, the goal is to exist as long as possible. To which we are not the reproductive system, but the cancer attacking it. I believe there is a reasonable chance that the existing human generation is the one that will have a global discussion about this as a way to frame balance as a possible goal of humanity. And maybe that discussion will not go well, but simply to have it would be noteworthy.
- odopodo 6y agoNot humanity, but capitalism. This need of constant growth is a phenomenon most other economic systems don't have.
- valvar 6y agoHow do these other economic systems you speak of ensure that reproduction remains below replacement levels?
- odopodo 6y agoNot below, but somehow balanced? This explosion of growth we are seeing is relatively recent, and is due not only to advances in technology, but also to cultural changes which may perhaps have been more important to enable this relentless expansion. What was the most recognized traditional means to become rich if not by pillaging and military conquest? The idea that you could (and should!) become rich by individual economic effort was not common at all. To the contrary, it was frequently taken to be immoral, like the Medieval condemnation of usury, or the ostracism of rich people in Ancient Greece.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- szatkus 6y agoIt's expected that the population will stabilize around 10-15 billions.
- bmitc 6y agoAt the cost of the destabilization of many other species and ecosystems.
- rollulus 6y agoIf so, then space colonisation is metastasis.
- Ekaros 6y agoI would call industrialisation metastasis... Colonisation is jumping hosts...
- bmitc 6y agoI think of this every time I’m in an airplane looking down. I can’t see the effects of all the other animals, but the effects upon Earth by humans is drastic and very infectious looking.
- meowster 6y agoNo. I feel like a lot of people aren't parsing the title correctly. IF the purpose of the company. Not the purpose of all companies. Humanity doesn't have purpose other than what we make of it. We can strive to maximize enjoyment while keeping population flat if we wanted to. Edit: The title was changed, it was something like: If a company's sole purpose is to grow, then it is no different from a cancer.
- LockAndLol 6y agoWe can but we don't. Our biological drive, coupled with our lack of volition to reason about it, is to reproduce. Most people don't care if pumping out a unit is the worst thing contribution to the planet's environment, they'll do it just because.
- vharuck 6y agoThis idea doesn't grok with falling birthrates in wealthy nations. People don't just live to reproduce. There is a biological drive to reproduce, but it is not unchecked. So the cancer metaphor is apt.
- swagasaurus-rex 6y agoIsland nations have always had to deal with the realities of Malthusian limits.
- eeZah7Ux 6y agoNo, the current mainstream economic system is the cancer and it's killing the host. Throughout history many civilizations based on endless growth started to collapse when they run out of territories to conquer or simply fuel. (e.g. the roman empire)
- nickflood 6y agoYes it is