What if there was a real monumental world changing event?

People climb mountains just out of interest, to fight boredom. But I am not sure that anyone will clean toilets or bury dead bodies being led by the same motives.

Spiritually and emotionally, we are drowning in insecurity.

Insecurity makes people claw and grab, try to control anything they can. To dominate and "conquer" the environment, even though nature is already very friendly to them. To dominate and control other people, even though we would all be better off as free individuals. To a drowning person, it doesn't matter if you push everyone else under water, as long as you can regain control.

Insecurity creates such an overwhelming need to control.

One solution: meditate.
Realize that insecurity is artificial (a self-induced panic) and that full control is impossible anyways. Let go. Accept things as they are, no matter how they are. Relax. You will be okay. Your actual needs are amazingly small. Everything will be okay. It's perfectly acceptable to just sit and watch, learn and love.

When we spend time sitting with starving people, then suddenly it will occur to us... "Hey, why not just feed them? I would like them to be happy."

But our own bloated insecurity keeps us at home, quivering by the supermarket, clinging and alone.

Interesting angle, presumably they would be willing to clean their own toilets and bury their own dead though?

I guess this amounts to saying that the world needs an economy to function.

As an alternate solution society or more specifically the politicians (after all they are voted in by society, they are our voice) would have to impose conditions on people with punishments (not necessarily incarceration but travel restrictions, withdrawal of privileges etc) for not meeting those conditions. You would then still have to work, you would be forced into being a valued member of society, in that way the mechanisms of capitalism remain without the need for money.



It would be a right pain in the neck to enforce though…..but we've seen in Iraq only this week that when law and order breaks down the population don't always run riot, there will always be righteous people who won't accept this kind of behaviour from the minority

CodeBorg

It is "us", the "real people" who create these people who would dominate and control. They are the bastions of industry and the politicians; while it is "us" who vote them into power and "us" who buy their products keeping them in a position where they can continue to push the weaker under the water.

"us" cares about what effects "us" directly, "us" likes the phrase "out of sight, out of mind". "us" disagrees with poverty, "us" wants to do something now but "us" sits by day after day and lets it continue. "us" likes the phrase "out of sight, out of mind"

There is another important factor here to be considered;
that is "consumerism" propaganda.

Dek's comment: "Surely if all the starving i.e. poor people in the world were healthier (economically?) and therefore richer they would contribute more to the world economy as consumers." implies that consumption is a "healthy" "positive" factor in economics.

The truth is we have been trained to think this by the corporate structure, anxious to keep building the level of "consumerism" and (a second economic myth) broadcasting the need for continued "growth", in order to simply increase the profits made by the corporations which promote these concepts, to agrandize the already disparate income levels of their senior executives, and shareholders, at the expense of "outside" economies which constantly experience a smaller and smaller "slice" of the resources of the planet, as more and more are constantly being co-opted to higher and higher production levels of consumer goods; most of which are unecessary items, marketed far beyond their actual "value", and manufactured in such a manner as to render them obsolete, or inopperable after an unreasonably short "lifespan".

The "economic myths" drive the growing gap between the "have"s, and "have not"s!

Surely the former is confirmed by the latter?

As for perpetual growth, companies grow to a maximum size (by increasing market share and absorbing smaller companies) until they reach a critical size, they then merely exchange market share with other companies in the same sector. In the UK the mergers and monopolies commotion prevents these companies from dominating a sector thus promoting competition.

The smaller players always maintain a place in this market as there will always be a certain niche market and individuals (myself included) who value criteria over what the big players offer; choice, quality, price, independence, integrity, morals and stubborn refusal to give my hard earned cash to the big meanies!

dEK

This may seem off point, but it truly isn't:

One of the most bizarre ideas humans have is that people must EARN their living.

Doing so causes some people to EARN their living at a huge cost to society.

Probably it would be best if somehow we insured that everyone have a basic package of physical needs (and some desires) -- a fairly decent basic package -- and let everything over the top of that minimum be what people have to EARN.

Oh, by the way -- PLEASE --

don't give me any COMMUNISM bullschidt about that last suggestion.

The one thing it ain't -- is COMMUNISM.

Excellent point frankA; and, as you say, it has nothing to do with communism, but everything to do with wisdom!

Frank, I'd say that this magic box of ours would give us this minimum, but aside from this how would you suggest we achieve it in the current world?

back on topic:

only a new inexhaustable form of clean energy, which would allow humanity to do all the things it desires, say harvest groves of pinapples trees at the south pole

or,

proof of other intelligent life in the universe, more at point, having that civilization communicating with the earth, would alter humanity into that which it is not today.

we have had 2500 years to digest the teachings of the buddha, 2,000 years to digest the teachings of jesus, 1500 years to digest the teachings of mohammed, and still we are bloodthirsty, naked apes.

forget about religion, forget about political systems. only a mechanism to alleviate the pressure of human needs and wants, or the utter humility of knowing we are not the apples of God's eye will convert humanity into its next step on the journey.

The interesting question here is WHO defines "the event".

It can be argued that "reality" is function of the observer, hence unless the very "nature of humanity" undergoes a change/mutation, then all events/discoveries will be subjected to the same primative tribal reactions (ingroup protection, greed, divine authority for actions,etc...) which seems to be the inevitable "fate" of mankind. Kuvasz's scenario of communication with other intelligent life is quite interesting in this respect. I think that truly "intelligent" life would either give us a wide berth, or contrary to the "Startrek Prime Directive", if "benign", they might need to perform a global "lobotomy" on us to bring us up to a level worth dealing with !

Yes but, a possible factor of an ET discovery is that maybe there would be a noticeable dip in the level of religious parochialism, and nationalism might just take second place to "Planet Earth"ism for once.

Or, more likely, the myriad religious persuasions would studiously deny the event as "scientific deception", and all the nations on the planet would insist that they alone, being obviously the most significant, be endorsed as "the" representatives of the human race!

I'd say a major philosophical evolutionary step would be needed.

Unfortunately, we humans seem to have evolved technologically at such a rapid pace, our philosophical evolution is trailing by a dangerous margin.

That deficiency is the reason we are not able to set the minimum I mentioned in my earlier post at this time. But that is peanuts compared with the other problems that ensue because of the disparity between our philosophical and technological evolutions.

Right now we have evolved technologically to the point where we could easily wipe out all life on our planet. Make no mistake; we have the technological wherewithal to do that. And…we have not evolved philosophically to the point where that possibility would be an absurdity.

In fact, we have not evolved philosophically to the point where that possibility is even remote.

Now that is a biggie.

I happen to think, however, that we'd do well to spend our time trying to work out the original problem -- seeing to it that everyone has at least a basic minimum. The fact that so many people don't -- and the fact that the number of people who don't appears to be growing -- and the fact that all this is occurring while some people are wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice -- can lead to the destruction I've mentioned easier than almost any other avenue.

Quite a vicious circle.

BTW - when I said earlier: "I'd say a major philosophical evolutionary step would be needed" - keep in mind. We could do it. WE COULD DO IT.

Not only could we terminate the existence of life on this planet, we are currently in the process of doing it.

What we need is the "will" to cure the ills of the planet, which we have set in motion.

Where there is a will there is a cure.

We could start creating new species faster than we extinct old ones. At least then we'd have more new problems than saving the old boring ones.

Genetics will cure all, but the cure may make you wish for the illness again!

Codeborg; there is a definite kernal of truth in your comment;

if as Kuvasz suggests, we find "...a new inexhaustable form of clean energy, which would allow humanity to do all the things it desires...", what would we do then?
Humanity is at its best when confronting seemingly insurmountable problems (at its best, I didn't say effective, or successful), take the challenge away, and what have we left to do?
"Evil lurks in the minds of men" when those little minds are not occupied.

truth
The discovery of nuclear FUSION, an unlimited source of CLEAN fuel. I cannot begin to guess what would be the equivalent in philosophical ideas. If I could I would probably be the one to develop it.

Dear forumers, I'm convinced we are the ones who are living the most monumental reckoning in human history. It suffices to seriously study UFOs, and you're there. Admitted: you'll have to cast off tons of prejudices first.

http://extraterrestrial-life.net/

This is the time we are fortunate to live in. Now we just need decent political representatives.

Life after death is to rot and turn to dust - unless you opt for cremation, then you go straight to dust.
Communism will never work. The first thing that suffers under communism is quality.