4 ms·

This fascination with "being remembered" is strange. We shouldn't optimize for being remembered (or being easy to reconstruct archaeologically). We should try t

by loxs 4y ago

This fascination with "being remembered" is strange. We shouldn't optimize for being remembered (or being easy to reconstruct archaeologically). We should try to not vanish. If we do vanish, why do we care about being remembered?

tsimionescu 4y ago
We will all die, and this time will pass - this is completely inevitable. There is no way to not vanish, the closest you can come is being remembered. Our civilization may well continue and prosper for a thousand years more, but unless we care about being remembered, they will have no idea what Pink Floyd, or Harry Potter, or A Hundred Years of Solitude, or an iPhone, or Linux, or anything else you consider important of our time were/was. Just like we have almost no idea about the pop culture or songs of people living in, say, the area of Berlin in the year 1022 was.
- jackcosgrove 4y ago
  > Just like we have almost no idea about the pop culture or songs of people living in, say, the area of Berlin in the year 1022 was. We can listen to the music of Hildegard of Bingen, who lived a little after that time in another part of Germany. It's not folk music, sure, but that's still pretty cool.
  - johnofthesea 4y ago
    > 1022 This seems to be like end of Ottonian Renaissance. So maybe someone like Hermann of Reichenau?
- loxs 4y ago
  And so what?
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    It's OK to say "being remembered doesn't matter", I was only pointing out that the alternatives are "being remembered" or "being forgotten" - and both are fine. There is no third option, though, "not vanishing".
lostlogin 4y ago
> This fascination with "being remembered" is strange. We shouldn't optimize for being remembered What if it’s about remembering rather than being remembered? There are some good lessons in past events.
rolenthedeep 4y ago
Think about the number of civilizations over the last hundred thousand years or so. Most of them are gone and we know very little about them. There are probably a lot that we don't even know existed in the first place. Ignoring the state of the world today, just on the numbers it's likely that this civilization will die and fade like every other. Given the choice, would you rather your civilization be understood to people in the future, or would you leave as little as possible behind and leave future historians with only guesses? > we should try to not vanish If this civilization survives for the next few thousand years, the work of the preservationists will end up in a museum to early Earth civilization. If not, then the preserved work will end up in a museum to early Earth civilization, but run by aliens or something. The need to be remembered is more of a philosophical argument, but I think it's just part of the human condition. It's why we pass our names to our children, why we tell stories. Thousands of years after the fact, almost everyone on the planet knows the names of at least some of the great conquerors of antiquity. Just about anyone you meet could probably tell you at least one story about Alexander the Great, or Genghis Khan, or Julius Caesar. As a wildly successful civilization, the need to be remembered for that success is strong. Maybe just for vanity, but maybe future generations can learn from our stories as well. If our civilization does fall and we are not remembered, what happens next? Would we have another Dark Age? If the remnants of our civilization can still use the knowledge we've accumulated, would that help them rebuild? It's really an unknowable question. The only thing we can be sure about is that it costs us relatively very, very little to preserve our records. If that effort is wasted, then so be it, but not putting in the effort would probably be bad in almost all situations, depending on your perspective.

by loxs 4y ago

tsimionescu 4y ago

We will all die, and this time will pass - this is completely inevitable. There is no way to not vanish, the closest you can come is being remembered. Our civilization may well continue and prosper for a thousand years more, but unless we care about being remembered, they will have no idea what Pink Floyd, or Harry Potter, or A Hundred Years of Solitude, or an iPhone, or Linux, or anything else you consider important of our time were/was. Just like we have almost no idea about the pop culture or songs of people living in, say, the area of Berlin in the year 1022 was.

jackcosgrove 4y ago
> Just like we have almost no idea about the pop culture or songs of people living in, say, the area of Berlin in the year 1022 was. We can listen to the music of Hildegard of Bingen, who lived a little after that time in another part of Germany. It's not folk music, sure, but that's still pretty cool.
- johnofthesea 4y ago
  > 1022 This seems to be like end of Ottonian Renaissance. So maybe someone like Hermann of Reichenau?
loxs 4y ago
And so what?
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  It's OK to say "being remembered doesn't matter", I was only pointing out that the alternatives are "being remembered" or "being forgotten" - and both are fine. There is no third option, though, "not vanishing".

lostlogin 4y ago

> This fascination with "being remembered" is strange. We shouldn't optimize for being remembered What if it’s about remembering rather than being remembered? There are some good lessons in past events.

rolenthedeep 4y ago

Think about the number of civilizations over the last hundred thousand years or so. Most of them are gone and we know very little about them. There are probably a lot that we don't even know existed in the first place. Ignoring the state of the world today, just on the numbers it's likely that this civilization will die and fade like every other. Given the choice, would you rather your civilization be understood to people in the future, or would you leave as little as possible behind and leave future historians with only guesses? > we should try to not vanish If this civilization survives for the next few thousand years, the work of the preservationists will end up in a museum to early Earth civilization. If not, then the preserved work will end up in a museum to early Earth civilization, but run by aliens or something. The need to be remembered is more of a philosophical argument, but I think it's just part of the human condition. It's why we pass our names to our children, why we tell stories. Thousands of years after the fact, almost everyone on the planet knows the names of at least some of the great conquerors of antiquity. Just about anyone you meet could probably tell you at least one story about Alexander the Great, or Genghis Khan, or Julius Caesar. As a wildly successful civilization, the need to be remembered for that success is strong. Maybe just for vanity, but maybe future generations can learn from our stories as well. If our civilization does fall and we are not remembered, what happens next? Would we have another Dark Age? If the remnants of our civilization can still use the knowledge we've accumulated, would that help them rebuild? It's really an unknowable question. The only thing we can be sure about is that it costs us relatively very, very little to preserve our records. If that effort is wasted, then so be it, but not putting in the effort would probably be bad in almost all situations, depending on your perspective.