Monday, March 12, 2012

The Future of Humanity?

"is your writing clear here? Would an average understand what you're trying to say here?"

The evolution of human beings is a highly debatable topic among historians, archaeologist, scientist, etc. Many people choose to observe the evolution of man or the changes occurring over time from a finite perspective. Overlooking the way in which humans think, noting all of the technological and social advancements that man has come to in thousands of years. Compared to life on Earth human beings are extremely young and yet populate most land masses on the planet. To think of the progress of humanity as evolution is in fact wrong; we have devolved since the times of the ancient empires of Sumer and Egypt, and before that the greatest human beings to walk the Earth. Complex is the word that many people would use to describe the current society present among humans. In this society humans are defined by what they want to do, and what they want to do should contribute to humanity. But saying that what humans do should contribute to humanity is almost exactly like arguing between good versus evil. There will be opinions for days. One movie that could epitomize the way humanity could operate from behind the scene is “The Matrix.” In the movie most human beings exist in an artificial world living an artificial life, controlled by machines. The real world consist of the cliche post apocalyptic black sky, with few human cities spread around Earth. The main antagonist Mr. Smith says something that closely approximates the mass population of human beings currently living. “ 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. . .” A simple systematic society will prevail in longevity in comparison to a society like that of the 21st century proved by the course of humanity and its history.

In the song Marathon Man by K the I featuring Thavius Beck, Beck says the following “ It's the opposition of the ominous who lust for dominance And the definition of cognition mixed with confidence Common sense incompetence composed within this document A message for the audience with a mass of multiple major monuments.” This statement can easily be translated as a reflection of the human race today. With so many technology advances in the 21st century alone, future progression of technology (and humanities manipulation of it) will only lead itself into destruction. “ It’s the opposition of the ominous who lust for dominance,” expresses Beck’s resilience of how the world is run today. In many countries seen across the world today a small percentage of the total population owns more than 50% of the wealth. Depending on the situations of the citizens of the nation, this may mean a neutrality among most people. Capitalism is often referred to by some to define the United States, and while Capitalism is looked down upon, it is only the natural course humans have took due to their evolution. Private companies run the world in the way that anything that may become a “necessity” to people will be contorted in way that the “owners” (or people who just say they are in charge) will gain more than the laborers and consumers combined. Again, this can only be expected because of the evolution of the human. Without attaching any negative thoughts to this, one could say that Beck’s statement about the opposition of the ominous that lust for dominance is pretty much the way to combat the collectively small percent of the world who own most of the world’s wealth.

Thinking back to the most over-used saturated term a child from the 4th grade to the 8th grade will hear in a social studies class in the U.S, the “Hunters-Gathers” time period was probably the most bright and best way for human beings to live. The “indigenous people” people of the world before religion spread in the Eastern hemisphere, lived a life of content pleasure with abundant stimulation or at least that’s what we can imagine. The demand for protection from the Earth’s common elements was in demand (shelter,clothing,etc) while the necessities of food and water we pretty much abundant at times. In relation to the mostly capitalistic world of today, the Hunter Gathers time period was much more prosperous both for Earth and humanity. The connection and balance that humans had with the Earth opposed to the relationship they have now has dwindled into a somewhat lax attempt at saving the planet. What many humans fail to realize is that “Going Green” has nothing to do with the planet, but the preservation of the human race. Even during the periods of the great civilizations (Egypt ,Sumer,Rome,Greece, and all the civilizations of the Americas) humans knew how to accurately consume enough of the Earth and consume enough of life (might be hard to contemplate). Paraphrasing Plato, the philosopher once said that “Human beings will always be affected negatively by over stimulation through literature, music, and theatre.” Imagine if Plato was alive today, the stimulates that most humans choose to embrace are rather a waste of time. Many skeptics of these ideas would say that if these simplistic societies (compared to the 21st century) were so great, why don’t the customs and way of humanity resemble those of the past? Why evolution of course!

The Great Pyramid of Giza is undoubtedly one of the most amazing works of art that man kind has ever attributed to. Still now with current technology of the 21st century, humans could not construct a structure so marvelous in mystery. There are many theories of how the Great Pyramid came to be but most rely on what humans today would call impossible human features including the man power and strength to lift a ton (exactly 1 ton). This thought itself only solidifies the idea that humans have devolved in thought and in their role on Earth. For one to commonly think of the creation of the Great Pyramid next to impossible but witness it’s awesome power is quite insane, yet many humans do. The vast amount of knowledge that was available for humans to discover is what stimulated the minds of many, while others were content with harvesting grain for the preservation of themselves and others around them. The spread of a mass consensus in thought was not necessary for free will was natural law. Referring back to Agent Smith and Thavius Beck, humanity has consumed the Earth existing as a deteriorating virus suffering from in fighting. It would be the simplistic devolution of the devolution that will propel humanity to excel and evolve. Hopefully, the saying “History always repeats itself,” holds true.

Note to Reader:

In knowing that this can be seen as an extremely opinionated paper (what piece of literature in human existence isn’t opinionated for I do not think any example exist) with vague historical mentions, these words are simply my underlying truth for the world I co-exist. To say that these words are simply my underlying truth for the world I exist in would be false for I create my world where I exist.

1 comment:

  1. You mentioned that humans should contribute to humanity. Basically, sacrifice their own selfish ambitions and give back to the greater good. This makes sense to me, but not to the world. Every single human being in the entire history of the world has based decisions around himself, that's fact. I think that wat you're arguing is true, that the only way to evolve further is to learn how to not live as 'islands' as John Donne would call it.

    Here's my main question:
    The problem is that no matter how hard we try and sacrifice for the greater humanity, it will always feel pointless if we're not serving a bigger picture. What is the point of serving a greater humanity if your world is only the world that you exist in? Why would you care about evolution and the progress of humanity if you only have less than 100 years to live?

    ReplyDelete