5 ms·

You believe there's nothing worth preserving in human civilization, that's there no purpose to anything humanity does? I'd argue we are biological beings with c

You believe there's nothing worth preserving in human civilization, that's there no purpose to anything humanity does? I'd argue we are biological beings with consciousness, we have the capability of experiencing wonderful things. As our ancestors did before us, isn't on us to keep the ball rolling, to allow future descendants to experience the joys of life and thought?

rTX5CMRXIfFG 5y ago
Trace up our ancestry far enough and you’ll realize that the earliest humans didn’t mean to bear us to experience the joys of life and thought but, really, they were just performing their natural, animalistic urges to hump each other.
- WhompingWindows 5y ago
  It's not procreation that's our sole purpose on Earth, however. Yes, Darwinian evolution posits that ability to procreate successfully shaped every species. However, I'd argue due to our consciousness, our ability to generate culture via language and history and tradition, our ability to manipulate the environment via tools and learning, these move beyond Darwinian evolution. Our culture and language and toolsets are extremely powerful and wonderful collective objects that are worth preserving and cultivating evermore. Just ask yourself, wouldn't it be a shame if there was no one around to listen to Beethoven or Mozart, to look at Monet or Van Gogh Paintings, or to appreciate the sound of poetry or the movement of a dancer? I think denying that humans are social beings in a massive social network is easy, that way nothing we do really "matters" to the universe, even though it matters intensely to other humans.
  - rTX5CMRXIfFG 5y ago
    To whom would it be a shame that no one is around to listen to the likes of Beethoven and Mozart when your premise is, exactly, that no one is around?
  - ModernMech 5y ago
    > wouldn't it be a shame if there was no one around to listen to Beethoven or Mozart, to look at Monet or Van Gogh Painting I notice the specific examples you list here are part of the western canon, which I assume is part of your culture and therefore important to you. But you didn’t list any artists from other cultures. Why do you think people living in another planet some time in the distant future would miss the artists from your culture? Wouldn’t they have their own art and music unique to them that they would care about more than the things you care about? I get that it’s sad to think about these artists dying for good (as in their art being wiped from collective memory) but it’s something that happens all the time to artists throughout history, and I really don’t think it’s a great shame on a cosmic scale that the artists you mention might be forgotten in the future. I think as much as you would want to share Mozart with the Martians, they will care about him just as much as you care about artists from South America in the year 900. That is to say, not at all.
- awb 5y ago
  Yet we don’t abandon our young, or even our elders, we look to find meaning beyond procreation and survival. Look at song, dance, storytelling, love, rituals, writing, art, mentoring, etc. We invest tons of time not procreating.

rTX5CMRXIfFG 5y ago

Trace up our ancestry far enough and you’ll realize that the earliest humans didn’t mean to bear us to experience the joys of life and thought but, really, they were just performing their natural, animalistic urges to hump each other.

WhompingWindows 5y ago
It's not procreation that's our sole purpose on Earth, however. Yes, Darwinian evolution posits that ability to procreate successfully shaped every species. However, I'd argue due to our consciousness, our ability to generate culture via language and history and tradition, our ability to manipulate the environment via tools and learning, these move beyond Darwinian evolution. Our culture and language and toolsets are extremely powerful and wonderful collective objects that are worth preserving and cultivating evermore. Just ask yourself, wouldn't it be a shame if there was no one around to listen to Beethoven or Mozart, to look at Monet or Van Gogh Paintings, or to appreciate the sound of poetry or the movement of a dancer? I think denying that humans are social beings in a massive social network is easy, that way nothing we do really "matters" to the universe, even though it matters intensely to other humans.
- rTX5CMRXIfFG 5y ago
  To whom would it be a shame that no one is around to listen to the likes of Beethoven and Mozart when your premise is, exactly, that no one is around?
- ModernMech 5y ago
  > wouldn't it be a shame if there was no one around to listen to Beethoven or Mozart, to look at Monet or Van Gogh Painting I notice the specific examples you list here are part of the western canon, which I assume is part of your culture and therefore important to you. But you didn’t list any artists from other cultures. Why do you think people living in another planet some time in the distant future would miss the artists from your culture? Wouldn’t they have their own art and music unique to them that they would care about more than the things you care about? I get that it’s sad to think about these artists dying for good (as in their art being wiped from collective memory) but it’s something that happens all the time to artists throughout history, and I really don’t think it’s a great shame on a cosmic scale that the artists you mention might be forgotten in the future. I think as much as you would want to share Mozart with the Martians, they will care about him just as much as you care about artists from South America in the year 900. That is to say, not at all.
awb 5y ago
Yet we don’t abandon our young, or even our elders, we look to find meaning beyond procreation and survival. Look at song, dance, storytelling, love, rituals, writing, art, mentoring, etc. We invest tons of time not procreating.