Is the World on a Downward Trajectory?

[IndigoChild5559]

The key idea (mentioned here by several threads here) in eschatological religions is that the world (and humans) need to be saved because how bad the world is becoming with humans straying from X (X being one's chosen religion). The problem with the idea is this:-

In any objective measure of human development, humans in general are far better off today than any time in past history (and this is true on a fairly continuous basis since 1900s). One can choose any measure of human development...but if one combines three basic quantifiable metric as:-
1) Is a person who is born living longer and healthier?
2) Is a person being born better educated?
3) Is a person being born has more disposable income to spend?

Then the chart below shows a tale that everywhere and in almost every decade, there has only been a steady increase in all these metrics. (Asia and African nations started growing after decolonization of course).
Historical Index of Human Development

No..you will not be better off if you were born in any past time in history. Indeed given the current trends your future descendants will be far far better off than you. This is no law of physics of course.... rather a testament that despite our enormous follies we are indeed doing better. That is a cause for hope and further dedicated effort.

If you wish to debate this point...please bring forth actual statistically sound data and not anecdotes, opinion pieces or catchy pictures. Thanks.

I view progress as two steps forward, one step back. In addition to scientific method giving us the wonders of technology and modern medicine, there have also been serious moral advances, such as the abolition of slavery, the civil rights movement, feminism, etc.

But I believe we are currently in a "one step back" period, where people have become increasingly rude and violent, fascism is spreading around the world, it is becoming more acceptable to be racist and anti-semitic again, as well as problems such as over population catching up to us and climage change hanging over us, threatening to harm us with lack of food and water.

As it says on King Solomon's ring, "This too shall pass."

 

[PureX]

Hmmm. What I am saying is that from what we observe the process of life appears to exhibit an inherent imperative to survive and reproduce, and as a survival mechanism life employs built in differentiation techniques that enable life to exploit multiple environments and to adapt to the continually changing conditions on earth. No one particular form appears to be preferred, just that forms continue to reproduce in all possible environments.

It's an observation, not a personal preference.

You did seem to be implying, however, that because life will evolve to repair the loss of previously evolved species, that somehow apart from human moral projection, there is no moral failing in one species causing the loss of hundreds of others, unless that loss is catastrophic to all the life on Earth. But that does not follow, logically. As it allows one life form to act contrary to the will of life, itself. Which, rather than indicating that one life form to be justified in doing so, would indicate that it is not justified. That WE are the destructive anomaly, here, not the rest of life on Earth.

It appears that we are some sort of hybrid species trying to evolve meta-physically, to fulfill that possibility, rather than evolving physically, to fulfill a natural environmental niche. We have overwhelmed our natural niche, to the point of destroying it, but have not yet evolved beyond that physical programming. And the destruction of life all around us, because of us, is telling us that we NEED to evolve, further. Not physically, but meta-physically. We need to evolve beyond our animal natures before we destroy all life on Earth.

 

[PureX]

The continued efforts of COP 27 and the upcoming COP 15 shows that while the pace of progress is not ideal, there is nevertheless much progress being made in real time to address both climate change and global biodiversity loss. Based on the trends I am seeing as of now, I will predict that the drivers of climate change and biodiversity loss (fossil based energy, and population and consumption driven growth in resource extraction) will flatten out between 2060 - 2080. We want to move the flattening to 2060 rather than 2080 and want to minimize the damage between now and the transition future...and for this global effort is needed. But it is doable and the worse case scenarios of ecological collapse or rapid ice sheet loss do not seem very likely based on the science.

Yet, at present, our efforts are not changing the dire trajectory. So calling it "progress" would seem to be a VERY optimistic description. Not to mention the fact that we do not know that we have until 2060 to successfully reverse this trajectory. For all we know we may have already started a 'cascade' effect that we cannot stop.

Spouting off about how we're going to do this or that while we are currently doing nearly nothing is not "progress". It's just more of the same behavior that is driving the disaster. Even if we stopped all pollution today, we are still going to face years of continued global warming and the increasingly disastrous effects of it. And we both know we are not going to stop polluting our environment, today. Or tomorrow. And even in the foreseeable future.

On your other point.... In the semi-mythological account of Buddha's life it is shown that as a prince he had the maximally materially utopian life and yet found it lacking for his metaphysical well being...and thus began his search for enlightenment. I am in 100% agreement with you that even if we transform the world into a Star Trek heaven, it will not create the necessary and sufficient conditions for human eudaimonia. The current focus on material need fulfillment will not deliver the expected results because it cannot. But it was merely 100-150 years ago that most of the world was dreadfully poor, with half of all children dying of disease and many women dying at childbirth. It will take generational time for society in general to shift from a focus on "my own need-fulfillment because tomorrow I can be dead" to a more holistic and long-term view of constructive development of humanity in physical, material, ecological and spiritual space. Hopefully the society we see today is not a pinnacle, but a mere stepping stone for further deep transitions to come over the many thousands of years that lie in its future.

If physical suffering were the only legitimate metrics for determining 'well-being', we could all just become heroin addicts until we die, and life would be short, but fantastic. But there is far more to well-being than avoiding physical suffering. Just as there is far more to life as a human being than longevity. And there is far more to freedom than avoiding slavery. The metrics you are using are way too biological and materialistic, and way too short on what actually makes life as a human being "good". I think you should rereconsider this.

However this thread is my opinion on a more limited argument made by followers of eschatological religions in that the world today is careering towards doom and destruction due to Godlessness etc. and a savior figure prophesized in a holy book will be coming soon to make everything all right.

How they frame the idea is not really that relevant, to me. It's the idea itself that matters. And they are not so far off in that regard. Ignoring the legitimacy of their prognostications just because you don't like the way they frame it is kind of silly, don't you think?

 

[soulsurvivor]

...Yes saviors are never needed. And they never saved us from anything ever anyways.

Congratulations for being so self-reliant so as to believe that Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus were never needed by humanity.

 

[sayak83]

Congratulations for being so self-reliant so as to believe that Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus were never needed by humanity.

Every human being is important, but nobody is necessary to save the rest of us.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes saviors are never needed. And they never saved us from anything ever anyways.

I see that is logically flawed.

That is akin to offering that mankind is in no need of education, that we do not need to rise above our animal selves.

Regards Tony

@soulsurvivor

 

[sayak83]

I see that is logically flawed.

That is akin to offering that mankind is in no need of education, that we do not need to rise above our animal selves.

Regards Tony

Mankind educates himself.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Mankind educates himself.

One has identified that we need education. So it is logical, mankind is also educated. One has to be educated to educate.

It then becomes logical those that claim they are a source of education for humanity, are most likely telling the truth.

That is exactly the quandary faced by Humanity, who are the best educators.

Example. Do I listen to you to find wisdom, or do I listen to Baha'u'llah? That is a perfectly reasonable question, given your reply.

Regards Tony

 

[sayak83]

One has identified that we need education. So it is logical, mankind is also educated. One has to be educated to educate.

It then becomes logical those that claim they are a source of education for humanity, are most likely telling the truth.

That is exactly the quandary faced by Humanity, who are the best educators.

Example. Do I listen to you to find wisdom, or do I listen to Baha'u'llah? That is a perfectly reasonable question, given your reply.

Regards Tony

No. One does not require any external source apart from observation and experience for education and growth. Education is simply a way to transmit the understanding developed in previous generations through cumulative experiences and observations in a condensed and effective form.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

One has identified that we need education. So it is logical, mankind is also educated. One has to be educated to educate.

It then becomes logical those that claim they are a source of education for humanity, are most likely telling the truth.

That is exactly the quandary faced by Humanity, who are the best educators.

Example. Do I listen to you to find wisdom, or do I listen to Baha'u'llah? That is a perfectly reasonable question, given your reply.

Regards Tony

No. One does not require any external source apart from observation and experience for education and growth. Education is simply a way to transmit the understanding developed in previous generations through cumulative experiences and observations in a condensed and effective form.

The quandary still remains, your answer was not satisfactory to my quest for meaning. Thus I see you are not able to satisfy my quest for that understanding, as your statement lacks meaning to me.

So for me I must look elsewhere as to who are the best educators?

Just so you know, the need for educators is a talk that does resonate with my world view, that it is not something I am making up, but already taught from someone I see is way wiser than all of us.

Spoiler: Need for and Educator

Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

Regards Tony

 

[JDMS]

One has identified that we need education. So it is logical, mankind is also educated. One has to be educated to educate.

It then becomes logical those that claim they are a source of education for humanity, are most likely telling the truth.

That is exactly the quandary faced by Humanity, who are the best educators.

Example. Do I listen to you to find wisdom, or do I listen to Baha'u'llah? That is a perfectly reasonable question, given your reply.

Regards Tony

No.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Mankind educates himself.

Mankind pronounces God redundant, and declares himself the highest power in the universe.

Fortunately some men and women, maybe just a few in each generation, in placing spiritual values above material aspirations, keep us collectively connected to the divine energy and purpose.

 

[soulsurvivor]

Every human being is important, but nobody is necessary to save the rest of us.

I stand corrected - 'Rama, Krishna, Buddha and Jesus are important human beings, but totally unnecessary to save humanity'!

 

[MikeF]

You did seem to be implying, however, that because life will evolve to repair the loss of previously evolved species, that somehow apart from human moral projection, there is no moral failing in one species causing the loss of hundreds of others, unless that loss is catastrophic to all the life on Earth. But that does not follow, logically. As it allows one life form to act contrary to the will of life, itself. Which, rather than indicating that one life form to be justified in doing so, would indicate that it is not justified. That WE are the destructive anomaly, here, not the rest of life on Earth.

It appears that we are some sort of hybrid species trying to evolve meta-physically, to fulfill that possibility, rather than evolving physically, to fulfill a natural environmental niche. We have overwhelmed our natural niche, to the point of destroying it, but have not yet evolved beyond that physical programming. And the destruction of life all around us, because of us, is telling us that we NEED to evolve, further. Not physically, but meta-physically. We need to evolve beyond our animal natures before we destroy all life on Earth.

First of all, I would assert that your phrase “the will of life” would be a mischaracterization. The imperatives governing the organism ‘Life’ is not a will, rather it would be better characterized as an algorithm or programming.

Second, since any conception of morals is a subjective abstract human construct, such a construct would not be applicable to the algorithms that govern this organism ‘Life’.

Third, there is no restriction in the algorithms of ‘Life’ that prevents one differentiated form from eliminating other differentiated forms. Hundreds of extinctions have resulted from only 30 invasive predator species, including rats, cats, and pigs. (Link)

Fourth, I would say that we human beings appear to be far from anomalous. Expanding into any and all possible environments and exploiting any and all available resources appear quite in keeping with the algorithmic imperatives to survive and reproduce. It is now to the point where this organism ‘Life’ has differentiated aspects that will allow it to expand beyond the confines of this planet.

I would also take issue with your characterization that we have overwhelmed our natural niche to the point of destroying it. If I recall correctly, matter-energy can be neither created or destroyed. What you seem to describe as destruction, I would describe as change, as destruction would imply that all must be preserved in its current configuration. For example, is the natural erosion of mountains into plains a destruction? Is the formation of a volcanic mountain upon a plain a destruction? Is the perpetual subduction of a continental plate into the planet's mantle a destruction? The cosmos is in constant change. Since the beginning of life on earth, life has been an engine of change on this planet. Human beings are just one further iteration of life changing the environment.

I also do not foresee the extinction of all life on earth as a result of human activity. Whatever changes are in store for the future, I see the organism ‘Life’ persisting, at least as long as the Sun persists. By that time, the organism ‘Life’ may have expanded beyond this solar system in whatever adapted forms exist at that time.

 

[sayak83]

The quandary still remains, your answer was not satisfactory to my quest for meaning. Thus I see you are not able to satisfy my quest for that understanding, as your statement lacks meaning to me.

So for me I must look elsewhere as to who are the best educators?

Just so you know, the need for educators is a talk that does resonate with my world view, that it is not something I am making up, but already taught from someone I see is way wiser than all of us.

Spoiler: Need for and Educator

Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

Regards Tony

Why does my statement lack meaning. It's coherent enough. What about it did you not understand.
You had school education yes? Did that knowledge (of say math or grammar) come from a human source or from some other than human authority figure?
You believe wisdom is different? Why? Justify?

 

[sayak83]

I stand corrected - 'Rama, Krishna, Buddha and Jesus are important human beings, but totally unnecessary to save humanity'!

That is my view correct. You find the proposition absurd? Explain why humanity needs a savior figure please?

 

[sayak83]

Mankind pronounces God redundant, and declares himself the highest power in the universe.

Fortunately some men and women, maybe just a few in each generation, in placing spiritual values above material aspirations, keep us collectively connected to the divine energy and purpose.

What is called Divinity exists within human beings themselves as it does on every aspect of the world. There is no special need to look for something or wait for the arrival of something that is within everything and everyone.

 

[soulsurvivor]

That is my view correct. You find the proposition absurd? Explain why humanity needs a savior figure please?

It is obvious that you definitely don't need any savior. You are already perfect or you will soon achieve perfection all by yourself.

 

[sayak83]

It is obvious that you definitely don't need any savior. You are already perfect or you will soon achieve perfection all by yourself.

I will as will you and everyone else. Perfection is the inevitable end to every being's journey through the multiple cycles of births and deaths. Since all beings are fundamentally indivisible aspects of the ultimate perfected reality (Brahman) hence they simply have to realize their innate perfected divine nature and the task is done. What needs to be eliminated is the illusion that one is imperfect, that one needs to be saved, that one is finite etc etc. Once that goes, you are done.
Neither the Buddha, Jina, or the Vedantic rishis or Krishna needed to perfected by anyone. They simply realized who they were and who everyone else were as well. Once that is fully understood, nothing further is to be done or achieved.

 

[RestlessSoul]

What is called Divinity exists within human beings themselves as it does on every aspect of the world. There is no special need to look for something or wait for the arrival of something that is within everything and everyone.

Well yes, okay. The Kingdom of God is within you, to say the same thing from a Christian perspective. However, it seems to me that a mass collective awakening is required, if humanity is to avoid the self inflicted disaster we have already initiated. Greed, pride, anger and delusion have to be overcome in each of us, in order for that awakening to occur, and to bear fruit. And the hour is getting late. In truth, we need a miracle of collective healing.