|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:29 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| johnnyenglishteacher2 wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| I wonder what percentage of this growth is in developing nations as opposed to developed nations. I know in several developed places the birthrate is below replacement. WIth enviromental degradation as bad as it already is, and resources being used a faster pace, I hope that technology can keep pace. |
environmental degradation?
Where? |
Soil acidification, freshwater & aquifer depletion, acid rain, deforestation, overfishing, eutrophication, chemical pollution in air and water....
Apart from that (and a load of other problems which have a massive effect on the well-being of humans and other species), everything's fine. |
Nothing we can't solve. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Floating World wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Imagine the artistic and cultural potential! We should rejoice that there are so many people. |
Music, movies and culture in general have been declining since the 70's, so I certainly wont be rejoicing. |
You are just getting old. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
While Kuros is right about the potential intellectual and cultural advances, Maslow teaches us that people have to have food and safety (etc) before they can self-actualize. Tolstoy did not spend his days digging through the garbage dumps of Moscow for food. He was physically comfortable enough to be able to think and write. |
Maslow was a hyptheses based on history, if he had know the technology would what it is today, he might have considered a less bleek future.
| Quote: |
Optimism is better than pessimism. Blind optimism is stupid and irresponsible. Keep in mind there was a 5,000 year lag between the agricultural revolution and the green revolution. There were a heck of a lot of people who starved to death in the interval. |
The Rational Optimist is actualyl a very good book to read.
| Quote: |
At some point, the capitalist model of produce, produce, produce, sell, sell, sell, buy, buy, buy and consume, consume, consume is going to be challenged by some model where materialistic desires are replaced by...I don't know, maybe cultural aspects of life?...after the basic necessities are met...some kind of much less materialistic orientation where quality of life is not measured by how many toys you die with. |
It's the only models that works, if you know a better one, that actually works, do tell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZIFA wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| At some point, the capitalist model of produce, produce, produce, sell, sell, sell, buy, buy, buy and consume, consume, consume is going to be challenged by some model where materialistic desires are replaced by...I don't know, maybe cultural aspects of life?...after the basic necessities are met...some kind of much less materialistic orientation where quality of life is not measured by how many toys you die with. |
Thats already happened in a lot of the west hasn't it?
Certainly in the UK for example. People sneer at wealth, they wouldn't work saturdays for any money. They're far more interested in finding meaning, fun and identity in their lives.
This capitalist hangover still hasn't arrived in Korea yet... but its definitely on the way. |
Finally someone who understands.
Due to increased productivity, people CAN work less and less to live a good life.
A continuous increase in productivity is the only way man can liberate itself from nature. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:41 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Quote: |
| At some point, the capitalist model of produce, produce, produce, sell, sell, sell, buy, buy, buy and consume, consume, consume is going to be challenged by some model where materialistic desires are replaced by...I don't know, maybe cultural aspects of life?...after the basic necessities are met...some kind of much less materialistic orientation where quality of life is not measured by how many toys you die with. |
I'm happy to see this.
As the saying goes, there are thousands hacking at the branches but not at the root.
Money is the root.
Whether you want to start with Egypt (or ancient China), we have progressively distributed wealth broader.
Up to the 1800s, we see wealth being taken from a small group and spread further.
As of the 20th century, we have a seemingly ingenious system wherein, in exchange for a vote, you deserve your place in society.
A place in society where we have soooo much money but cannot afford to pay for the starving.
Money, a man-made construct, prohibits us from allowing humans to live with dignity.
If money is what limits us, then MONEY is the problem.
Shall we not steal from the rich? The easiest way is if they aren't the rich.
IF THE RICH CAN'T AFFORD TO HELP THE POOR, THEN HOW CAN YOU AFFORD TO BE RICH? |
Oooh my
What an idiotic diatribe of nonsense, if the world was only so simple, we could all do like you and be merry.
Luckily most of humanity understands, if unconsciously, why we need money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| I wonder what percentage of this growth is in developing nations as opposed to developed nations. I know in several developed places the birthrate is below replacement. WIth enviromental degradation as bad as it already is, and resources being used a faster pace, I hope that technology can keep pace. |
environmental degradation?
Where? |
Melting ice caps, Japan, Pakistan, Thailand, etc. etc. etc. extreme weather has been incurring a greater rate in recent history than any other time before.
Not to mention that the countries with big pop. density like China and India are anything but clean. Air quality, etc. |
To my knowledge, cities have become cleaner then ever before, certainly compared to the Industrialization era. |
Which cities and what do you mean by cleaner? India and China certianly are not cleaner. Developed countries, maybe. Third World countires are where the growth is largely generated though. Also these developing countries are rapidly developing a need for more resources as they develope and get richer. |
And through increased technology we have access to increased amounts of resources.
The wonderful thing about human ingenuity is once we understand the problem, we tend to find a solution for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:56 pm Post subject: Re: Scientists slow aging process but 7 billion of us alread |
|
|
| No_hite_pls wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| johnnyenglishteacher2 wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| 7 billion human lives! Imagine the scientific potential! Imagine the artistic and cultural potential! We should rejoice that there are so many people. |
Imagine the mass starvation if we have a couple of years of severe drought in one of the world's main agricultural areas! |
So your solution to disaster prevention would be birth control . . . rather than investment in insurance and stockpiles?
I swear, the anti-life streak in the environmentalist movement may be the densest of all sentiments on the Left. Isn't the Left supposed to have some sort of faith in science and progress? Or at least some knowledge of history? |
Not all lefty's think like that. I for one agreed with Kuros that environmentalist and anti-life sentiment is ridiculous. One thing that living in Asia has taught me is that in the west there is under population especially in US, Canada and France. |
I didn't mean to imply that all Lefties think this way. Just that its a noticeable sentiment among a significant number of the Left.
| Juregen wrote: |
| A continuous increase in productivity is the only way man can liberate itself from nature. |
I agree. There's no going back, for a lot of reasons. The only way is forwards. And the beautiful part is: we won't be entirely responsible for what comes, it'll be in the hands of our children and grandchildren, as well. And I hope our children and grandchildren are multitudinous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnnyenglishteacher2
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:21 pm Post subject: Re: Scientists slow aging process but 7 billion of us alread |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| My chosen profession is irrelevant here. |
I wasn't trying to belittle you here, by the way, I just think that sometimes non-scientists come out with these wishlists that technology might possibly be able to deliver. History, however, is littered with examples of promising technologies which never got off the ground for one reason or another. Personally I'd like to see a global system of maglev trains doing thousands of mph in vacuum tunnels - technically feasible, but sadly highly unlikely to happen in the next century.
| Kuros wrote: |
But I have done some research on this issue. Climate Engineering and Technology are considered the most promising avenues, and actually cutting carbon and "green energy" are considered the least cost-effective. (Moderately effective: planning for adaptation, tech exchanges, forestry, and cutting black carbon/methane). And yes, I'm taking my cues from consortiums of economists AND climatologists, because the solutions are as much about maximizing efficiency as they are about political possibility.
Specifically, the five most promising avenues for climate damage mitigation are:
* Marine Cloud Whitening Research
* Energy R&D
* Stratospheric Aerosol Reduction Research
* Carbon Storage Research
* Research into Air Capture
Take it away, Bjorn Lomborg |
Apart from energy R&D, which definitely could lead to reductions in CO2 emissions, the others are still very much in their infancy, and may never work out in the real world. Besides which, I didn't mention climate change, I was talking about food and water security. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnnyenglishteacher2
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Juregen wrote: |
| johnnyenglishteacher2 wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| I wonder what percentage of this growth is in developing nations as opposed to developed nations. I know in several developed places the birthrate is below replacement. WIth enviromental degradation as bad as it already is, and resources being used a faster pace, I hope that technology can keep pace. |
environmental degradation?
Where? |
Soil acidification, freshwater & aquifer depletion, acid rain, deforestation, overfishing, eutrophication, chemical pollution in air and water....
Apart from that (and a load of other problems which have a massive effect on the well-being of humans and other species), everything's fine. |
Nothing we can't solve. |
I'm all ears. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| I wonder what percentage of this growth is in developing nations as opposed to developed nations. I know in several developed places the birthrate is below replacement. WIth enviromental degradation as bad as it already is, and resources being used a faster pace, I hope that technology can keep pace. |
environmental degradation?
Where? |
Melting ice caps, Japan, Pakistan, Thailand, etc. etc. etc. extreme weather has been incurring a greater rate in recent history than any other time before.
Not to mention that the countries with big pop. density like China and India are anything but clean. Air quality, etc. |
To my knowledge, cities have become cleaner then ever before, certainly compared to the Industrialization era. |
Which cities and what do you mean by cleaner? India and China certianly are not cleaner. Developed countries, maybe. Third World countires are where the growth is largely generated though. Also these developing countries are rapidly developing a need for more resources as they develope and get richer. |
And through increased technology we have access to increased amounts of resources.
The wonderful thing about human ingenuity is once we understand the problem, we tend to find a solution for it. |
It's great to be optimistic, but our resources are finite, and a large number of the most powerful and wealthy people have a vested interest in not understanding the problem. Human ingenuity is endless, but resources and how much damage the environment can withstand are not. If we were focusing, at all, on the problem in a serious way than I would agree. Also most of the innovation comes from the developed world, but most of the population increase, by a large amount, is coming from the undeveloped or developing world. The developed world can try to force it's environmental will on countries like China, but that obviously is futile. I'm not feeling overly pessimistic about it, but your platitudes are bit too simple and naive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Floating World
Joined: 01 Oct 2011
Location: Here
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| A continuous increase in productivity is the only way man can liberate itself from nature. |
Complete and utter nonsense.
Without nature we'd die.
We are part of nature, the same minerals and elements that make up the natural earth, nut to mentionthe actual physical universe are the same that are in our bodies!
Now I'm no luddite, but we will never become completely apart from nature, it's impossible.
Unless you're one of those Kurzweilliens who think we're gonna download our consciousnesses into micrchips or dust clouds or whatever.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Juregen wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| I wonder what percentage of this growth is in developing nations as opposed to developed nations. I know in several developed places the birthrate is below replacement. WIth enviromental degradation as bad as it already is, and resources being used a faster pace, I hope that technology can keep pace. |
environmental degradation?
Where? |
Melting ice caps, Japan, Pakistan, Thailand, etc. etc. etc. extreme weather has been incurring a greater rate in recent history than any other time before.
Not to mention that the countries with big pop. density like China and India are anything but clean. Air quality, etc. |
To my knowledge, cities have become cleaner then ever before, certainly compared to the Industrialization era. |
Which cities and what do you mean by cleaner? India and China certianly are not cleaner. Developed countries, maybe. Third World countires are where the growth is largely generated though. Also these developing countries are rapidly developing a need for more resources as they develope and get richer. |
And through increased technology we have access to increased amounts of resources.
The wonderful thing about human ingenuity is once we understand the problem, we tend to find a solution for it. |
It's great to be optimistic, but our resources are finite, and a large number of the most powerful and wealthy people have a vested interest in not understanding the problem. Human ingenuity is endless, but resources and how much damage the environment can withstand are not. If we were focusing, at all, on the problem in a serious way than I would agree. Also most of the innovation comes from the developed world, but most of the population increase, by a large amount, is coming from the undeveloped or developing world. The developed world can try to force it's environmental will on countries like China, but that obviously is futile. I'm not feeling overly pessimistic about it, but your platitudes are bit too simple and naive. |
The same words have been spoken in the last 200 years with 10 years interval again and again, and again and again they have proven to be false. Yes the Universe is Finite, but Human ingenuity still has to meet it's limits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Floating World wrote: |
| Quote: |
| A continuous increase in productivity is the only way man can liberate itself from nature. |
Complete and utter nonsense.
Without nature we'd die.
We are part of nature, the same minerals and elements that make up the natural earth, nut to mentionthe actual physical universe are the same that are in our bodies!
Now I'm no luddite, but we will never become completely apart from nature, it's impossible.
Unless you're one of those Kurzweilliens who think we're gonna download our consciousnesses into micrchips or dust clouds or whatever. |
You misinterpreted the meaning of liberate. At the moment we are still heavily dependent on Nature for our survival, but technology has enabled us greater freedom in choices of what we can and cannot do.
Just imagine how many hours you have to work today to provide sufficient nutrients to your table. Imagine 50 years ago, imagine 200 years ago, imagine 2.000 years ago.
It is this increased productivity that has allowed us to pursue greater scientific discovery than ever before.
Just the fact you can write that message and be read by someone you have never met in itself is nothing more then a product of our increased productivity to make food, and all the time saved spent on inventing the internet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Floating World
Joined: 01 Oct 2011
Location: Here
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Just imagine how many hours you have to work today to provide sufficient nutrients to your table. Imagine 50 years ago, imagine 200 years ago, imagine 2.000 years ago. |
Me yes. People in Africa, rural China and many other impoverished nations however... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Floating World wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Just imagine how many hours you have to work today to provide sufficient nutrients to your table. Imagine 50 years ago, imagine 200 years ago, imagine 2.000 years ago. |
Me yes. People in Africa, rural China and many other impoverished nations however... |
EXACTLY
Finally you get it!
Why are they impoverished? Because they are insufficiently productive.
Africa, if not for it's self-destructive, supported politics, could have been a major player by now.
Rural China is like any other rural area, just a bit bigger, and therefore a bit worse the case.
It still stands that improved productivity will remedy most of those issues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
