posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:08 PM
This is about any society ending scenaro. Whether it be nuclear war, apocolypse, a solar flare that ends electronics, a massive virus, or anything
that would decimate the population or society as we know it. A
"The Stand" scenario, where only a few survive.
I bring this up because I am reading a book, that was given to me by a friend, about this very thing. What would happen if technology was destroyed
and we were left with a handful of people scattered around the world to carry on?
This book is about how the best and worst of society will come to light. You have the Lord of the Flies types who take over and use fear and control
as a method of rule.
Or would we have pockets of kind leaders, who would bring order but make the best come out of people and use thier strenghts to unify the group? Or
would we have a bit of everything?
I find the concept interesting, and would wonder what the thoughts are of the members here, exactly would society turn into?
An interesting view is that of Nightfall by Isaac Asimov and that a war would break out for leadership between science and religion, and people take
sides with one or the other.
Do you think, when put into the worst of survival situations, when resources are scarce, that humans would revert to their worst forms, even killing
for the simplest rations?
That people would lose their morals and humanity instantly?
Or do you think people would maintain some kind of order? Those who have morals keep them, those who are criminally minded or selfish remain so?
I think we can all agree that humans need a pecking order. There are always leaders and always followers and people would break into groups as such.
The alpha, beta, gammas.
Studies have shown time and again that people naturally break into their area of expertise, in teh event of an emergency. For example, those who are
doctors, nurses, and emts automatically start treating people. Those who lead naturally start leading and directing people. A teacher will take
their role and start instructing people. Those who know how to defend do so. This is a readily accepted idea, that is even portrayed in Hollywood
movies as such. But in many times, the weak are still defended.
Would that stay the same? Or in the name of survival, those who can't produce something worthy of the group are eliminated? Do we not treat the sick
and use valuable resources on them?
Your input is appreciated.