posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 10:05 PM
With all of the changes in hte modern world versus 100 yeasr ago, it's hard to tell what's going on. They will be forced to do something about this
and the answer might not be the one we want. And to adopt the technologies we need to succeed in the future might also change our behavior or induce
in us motivation to change it. And how we might change it might also be what we don't want. But it's hard to know what what we do and don't want when
there's so much about the past we just don't know or forgot. Kids living today don't know what it was like before they were born, they can only
imagine it from what they read and hear and see.
When they're able to install "thought scanners" or "behavior scanners" in airports or in high-security areas to detect people with criminal intent,
how will that change things? How has office work or increased hours in school changed people, since there's such a reduction in physical movement?
Several decades ago, many people didn't even go to college. And before that, many people didn't even get into highschool. Technology of all sorts over
the past few centuries has caused us to sit a lot more or not move as much. Yet we've invested heavily in social services and we absorb far more
information in a given day than we would have 200 years ago.
What if they decide criminals have a mental disorder and shouldn't be seen as evil, rather as a disordered invividual? Some people will say that's
good, but some will say it's bad. There're all sorts of unintended consequences to all this.
Think about it. With camaras and computers EVERYWHERE because they're so cheap, how will it change things? It WILL, but it's hard to predict.
My prediction (why not?) is all these cutters are going to be put on drugs, if they're not already on them. How will it change things? No idea.
People have said evolution doesn't happen today because natural selection is sabotaged. People who should be culled are not being culled. Instead -
because of technology and social awareness - they're surviving. Genetics are being preserved without regard to their ability to survive. This is the
argument. However, I think this is ignoring evolution that can happen within a single lifetime (genes can switch on/off) and evolution that can happen
culturally and socially. I also think it ignores the immense cost of welfare programs and how society might evolve to reduce those costs. Welfare
isn't free and society needs it to be effective.
edit on 16-3-2014 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)