Technological vs Spiritual Evolution

Forums: Philosophy, Philosophy Of Science
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Hey, all.

As I mentioned in my introduction, I'm fascinated by the future and some of the technology we're going to see in the next few decades. Word is immortality is a scant 20 or 25 years away thanks to medical breakthroughs; particularly those in nano-technology. Someday we'll all have IQs over 1,000 and even be able to download our minds into digital circuitry. I'm not anti-technology; I'm pro-technology, but my concern is that humans are evolving far faster technologically than we're evolving spiritually. By "spiritually" I don't mean to make any reference to any religion or even the existence of a God or soul. I mean that we don't seem to be getting much wiser. We still fight and kill each other for a myriad of reasons. Any technology we develop to help ourselves is at LEAST as likely to be used to hurt us. Even if we do manage to alter our brains to run with the speed and efficiency of quantum computers, will that make us a more peaceful, rational species? Does high intelligence equal a more benevolent nature? Or will we just be thinking of more creative and devastating ways to destroy ourselves? In his book "Conversations with God", "God" (or Neale Donald Walsch, if you prefer) says that "The inability to experience the suffering of other is what allows suffering to continue." Perhaps in addition to pursuing greater levels of technological development and higher IQs, we also need to work on our capacity for empathy and understanding each other. You can hardly blame me for suspecting that humans are on a path toward self-destruction, if some natural disaster doesn't get us first. I think the problem is that we've pursued technology at the expense of cultivating our understanding of ourselves and each other. What can be done to bring about a balance? Can we be saved before we destroy ourselves?

P.S: Can anyone recommend any good readings on this? Thanks.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,621 • Replies: 14

No top replies

@Omeo,

Hey Omeo,

Omeo;148776 wrote:

...Word is immortality is a scant 20 or 25 years away thanks to medical breakthroughs; particularly those in nano-technology. Someday we'll all have IQs over 1,000 and even be able to download our minds into digital circuitry.

Yea I've heard these kinds of claims since I was a tyke; I wouldn't hold my breath on this. Claims of the future rarely turn out as predicted. Nonetheless...

Omeo;148776 wrote:

I'm not anti-technology; I'm pro-technology, but my concern is that humans are evolving far faster technologically than we're evolving spiritually. By "spiritually" I don't mean to make any reference to any religion or even the existence of a God or soul. I mean that we don't seem to be getting much wiser.

Yea, I share your concern. But spirituality can exist without wisdom (and vice-versa). They don't innately have anything to do, one with the other. In some cases wisdom may go hand-in-hand with spirituality and other cases you have very spiritual people whom are quite wise. But they're not mutually exclusive.

But as far as wisdom, in general, not on-par with technology; Absolutely. Advances have been outstripping our ability to wisely apply and use such technology for quite some time. I'm definitely with you there.

Omeo;148776 wrote:

... In his book "Conversations with God", "God" (or Neale Donald Walsch, if you prefer) says that "The inability to experience the suffering of other is what allows suffering to continue."

Ah, this is a quite good. I'd add that one needn't experience someone else's suffering directly to act with due urgency to help one another - that it's lack of empathy, perhaps more quantitatively, since without proportional suffering (or the ability to 'identify' with another's plight) virtually no one cares. Hand in hand with this is the mental self-protection mechanism we so see so often that rationalizes, "Ah, it's their own fault!"; kicking in self-righteous vengeance that allows many to forego compassionate behavior.

Omeo;148776 wrote:

You can hardly blame me for suspecting that humans are on a path toward self-destruction, if some natural disaster doesn't get us first. I think the problem is that we've pursued technology at the expense of cultivating our understanding of ourselves and each other. What can be done to bring about a balance? Can we be saved before we destroy ourselves?

Yes I think we're on a path towards self-destruction and yes, I agree that relentlessly pursuing technology is a part of that. I'd like to add a few thoughts on this thought though:

Throughout time, many have made this same decree; and to the extent that circumstances appear, I wouldn't doubt any of their sincerity. Still, one has to acknowledge the idea that... well, we're still here. We seem to keep surviving despite the immediacy of our problems. Given this, one has to critically examine: Are we really?

There's no doubt that our misuse of technology has had disastrous results. In all fairness, one must also realize that this same pursuit has done a great deal of good (even mitigating previously-incurred damage)

Omeo;148776 wrote:

P.S: Can anyone recommend any good readings on this? Thanks.

Absolutely: Devices of the Soul (Link to Review) and Distracted (Link to Review) are two that immediately come to mind.

Nice Post, thanks

0 Replies

@Omeo,

Omeo;148776 wrote:

P.S: Can anyone recommend any good readings on this? Thanks.

You might find some of these books interesting.

0 Replies

@Omeo,

Very, very good Omeo. It is true, technology may bail us out of the pits we have been digging ourselves but in turn technology without morality will keep digging us all new ones.
And technology will sooner or later (we know the day nor the hour) deliver the power of armageddon into the hands of the disenfranchised. And by the time it does we better make sure we have developed the moral standards to discourage them.
A technological civilisation based on inequality is a civilisation that is doomed.

1 Reply

@sarek,

Omeo wrote:

By "spiritually" I don't mean to make any reference to any religion or even the existence of a God or soul. I mean that we don't seem to be getting much wiser. We still fight and kill each other for a myriad of reasons.

100 years ago the imperialistic western countries were busy dividing the world up between themselves, and eventually fought massive wars over territory. Millions were put to death by Hitler and Stalin. Women and minorities had limited rights. How have we not gotten wiser?

Today the wisest countries are those with the most technology. Technology allows us to relax and not have to worry about our own survival/safety--and I think that worry is the basis of the majority of evil actions.

0 Replies

@Omeo,

Omeo;148776 wrote:

Can we be saved before we destroy ourselves?
P.S: Can anyone recommend any good readings on this? Thanks.

A very interesting issue indeed.
Personally i do not believe anymore that we are about to eliminate ourselves. Even though we have the potential to do so and we even might, i think it's more likely that we cause a devastating desaster that actually reduces the number of humans to a minimum which however is enough to start of with a whole new civilization.
Hopefully it's not going to be like in H.G. Wells' Time Machine, just kidding.
But really, the feeling of being part of the last generation to live on earth seems to be something like an archetype - there have been prophets claiming the end of the world for thousands of years. The idea seems to be somewhat tempting on a subconscious level, that's why i try to resist it (even though my world view is normally very pessimistic).
Back to your question.
I am not precisely as optimistic as e.g. Kurtzweil but i guess in the long run most features will become real more or less the way he predicts it.
Maybe not so soon but, yes we will connect our neurons to machines that increase our information processing capacity enormously.
We will access the vocabulary of any language as if we had learned every single word and we will solve highly complex equations without even knowing how that works.
At least a part of us will, because honestly i believe all of this will only be affordable for those who hold the capital.
Problem is that a high IQ does not create a mature personality.
Isn't it interesting how you find all political orientations when you look at highly intellectual people? You have everything from right extremes to left extremes.
Honestly i do not believe anymore that intelligence is a key to get a clear understanding of the world and how it works.
If political understanding is a question of intelligence than how can it be that the most intelligent people (i am NOT talking about politicians) do not find a conensus but actually are fighting each other as passionately as is done at the bottom?
Today i think someones political orientation is based on his personality which is formed in the first 6 years of his life, making him a more extro- or introverted person, more open minded or more holding on to given values, more ego or more social, etc.
Personality however is certainly a topic of its own.
Anyway there have always been intelligent monsters like Dr. Mengele, some of them killing cold blooded and others thrilled by seeing other humans' torture.
An IQ of 1000 will change the means of killing but not human nature.

A book (or story) that i would like to recommend is 'Golem XIV' by Stanislaw Lem. It's certainly one of the most sophisticated novels about the question of evolution in a technological context, analyzing the problem scientifically as well as philosophically and adding the characteristic pinch of humour.

0 Replies

@Omeo,

There is no such thing as a spiritual evolution. All supposed signs of such a evolution of values, ideas, wisdom, rationality or morality can be explained as consequences of technological evolution. Since there is no evolution in wisdom it can not "fall behind" technological evolution.

2 Replies

@EmperorNero,

EmperorNero;154311 wrote:

There is no such thing as a spiritual evolution. All supposed signs of such a evolution of values, ideas, wisdom, rationality or morality can be explained as consequences of technological evolution.

but no Human Spirit attitude

which has nothing to do at all , with technology

Quote:

Since there is no evolution in wisdom it can not "fall behind" technological evolution.

I disagree

the more we put ourselves , our spirit , our Human spirit , into technology , the less evolved we , Humans , become

technology should be looked at as a tool not the final end of us

0 Replies

@EmperorNero,

EmperorNero;154311 wrote:

There is no such thing as a spiritual evolution. All supposed signs of such a evolution of values, ideas, wisdom, rationality or morality can be explained as consequences of technological evolution. Since there is no evolution in wisdom it can not "fall behind" technological evolution.

I am really curious how you see moral and wisdom caused by technology.

1 Reply

@Exebeche,

Exebeche;155205 wrote:

I am really curious how you see moral and wisdom caused by technology.

Simple. Every change that we attribute to higher morality is really a consequence of changed technology.
One example: The end of slavery. Did we become more moral and therefore decided to end it, as the lefties say? No, capitalism progressed, therefore we became richer and now we can afford to not have slavery.
Pick any example of supposed moral evolution, and I tell you how it's really caused by technology.

2 Replies

@EmperorNero,

I am as of yet unconvinced on the topic of moral evolution. I'd like to see more from you adherents since I've not considered all the faces of this animal, but for right now...[INDENT]1) I'm not sure there's has been any moral evolution at all; there exists now the same issues, same examples of ghastly immorality and same problems as has always been - at some points less or more profuse, (and yes, this includes genocide). Some areas have become 'more' moral in my opinion - in some ways - but have digressed in others making it tough to lay claim to any valid judgment on the whole of humanity.

2) I'm not sure that such a thing as "moral evolution" even exists. If I cast this in an evolutionary context, I have a hard time seeing how this might occur in any permanent (or semi-permanent) manner. Morals, although I do believe are influenced to some extent by permanent/hereditary are by and large based on dynamic factors that - no matter how many generations pass - can be, in a single instance, set back to zero, so to speak. Now, if we're talking on a smaller scale (say, cultural), I believe that a good number of sects/nations might lay claim to 'moral improvement'. But to call it evolutionary imbides feels over-aggrandized and disproportionate. This makes the idea that even some change could be termed 'evolutionary' spurious. Again, I'm open to explanation/persuasion; I have a feeling there might be something there, I just don't see it.
[/INDENT]As far as technology's influence; Yea, I think there's a great number of moral 'achievements' to which we can attribute advances. We need to be careful though; since any technology's marches forth every day of every year and many carry far and wide effects, any change (good or bad) likely does include a technological element; but this isn't necessary causal. Sure, some are, but to cast them all as being a product of, is stretching it.

Thanks

0 Replies

@EmperorNero,

Interesting point of view.
Actually in which part of the world have they got rid of slavery?
According to Amensty International 700000 women from poor countries are kidnapped for working as sex slaves in rich countries EACH YEAR.
Not to mention the millions of working slaves who are forced to serve in their home country many of which are children.
Sorry, no proof for your statement here.

EmperorNero;155217 wrote:

No, capitalism progressed, therefore we became richer and now we can afford to not have slavery.

No, capitalism progressed, therefore we became richer and now we can afford not to let our slaves live in our nice countries.

1 Reply

@Exebeche,

Exebeche;155594 wrote:

Interesting point of view.
Actually in which part of the world have they got rid of slavery?
According to Amensty International 700000 women from poor countries are kidnapped for working as sex slaves in rich countries EACH YEAR.
Not to mention the millions of working slaves who are forced to serve in their home country many of which are children.
Sorry, no proof for your statement here.

Fits fine with my statement that the end (or rather reduction) of slavery is a consequence of capitalism. Where in the developed world do we have those sex slaves? In the lef-wing areas, with the epi-center in San Francisco, California. I.e. the places where we are abandoning capitalism again.

Exebeche;155594 wrote:

No, capitalism progressed, therefore we became richer and now we can afford not to let our slaves live in our nice countries.

The more capitalism, the less slavery.

1 Reply

@Omeo,

Sorry EmperorNero, you are trying to put a square peg into a round hole. It just ain't gonna fit, no matter you rationalize it. Slavery is a colossal problem all over the world. You also said the Feudal system was over. Don't you think that a bit naive? It changed it's name to protect the guilty to the master slave system and then to the government over the governed then Law and order. It started with intellect/haves over ignorance/have nots. What do you think it will be next? Technology over human? No thanks. I'll let you experience that. I don't care to.

William

0 Replies

@EmperorNero,

EmperorNero;155679 wrote:

Where in the developed world do we have those sex slaves? In the lef-wing areas, with the epi-center in San Francisco, California.

If you regard the USA as the world this answer may fit, i don't know.
If however you regard planet earth as the world you will see that it's a stream from third world countries to industrialised countries.
This is because systems based on capitalism, if not regulated, tend to encourage exploitation.

In any case the Pros and Cons of capitalism are not based on technology.
The slaves simply exist, so your argument referring to slavery is not valid.

0 Replies

Technological vs Spiritual Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know