Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Op 21-7-2023 om 00:34 schreef Samuel B.:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >> Op 18/07/2023 om 23:22 schreef Samuel B.:
> >>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >>>> Op 18-7-2023 om 00:40 schreef Samuel B.:
> >>>>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >>>>>> Op 17-7-2023 om 01:00 schreef Samuel B.:
> >>>>>>> [...] the shape doesn't seem like it was made for stabbing.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think those swords were not used for stabbing but chopping.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Maybe this will interest you:
> >>>>>>
https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-trade-blows-in-a-debate-over-whether-ancient-bronze-swords-were-just-f
or-show
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yeah, that is interesting. I wonder why there was any doubt, though. [...]
> >>>>>
> >>>> I think because there still is a lack of knowledge/understanding about
> >>>> Bronze Age society. [...]
> >>>>
> >>> [...] we humans are often driven by various (maybe illogical) ideals and weird
> >>> beliefs ;)
> >>>
> >> It probably made a lot of sense at the time. Rites and beliefs were and
> >> still are the means of knitting together social groups, often in
> >> opposition to other groups unfortunately. That is the fundamental
> >> problem social animals like ourselves are born with. [...]
> >
> > The problem with we humans is that our activities tend to have far-ranging
> > effects. Yeah, everything we do can be considered 'natural', but we also possess
> > greater reasoning capabilities, and so we have more responsibility compared to
> > other creatures... Which would imply a degree of free will, which is a whole
> > other conversation. (For instance if the principle of cause and effect reigns
> > supreme, how could there be free will? The best I can figure is that there are
> > 'tiers' of free will, but ultimately only one outcome per 'timeline'. [Each
> > timeline being like a single lightning strike, and all timelines overlapping to
> > form a fuzzy probability cloud.])
> >
> [...] we may assume  that - at some point in human development - the impact of our
> so-called free will(?) governed/controlled by environment, climate, society
> interactions, psychology, religion of course, etc decisions, started to
> increasingly impact on the natural environment of the planet, from local to global
> through human history.

Yeah. Every action made by anything or anyone has an effect everywhere, and all
effects vary in intensity and complexity. Things effect us, we effect things,
yadayada. But we humans are not only able to make things change at local and
global scales (intentionally or not), but we can also potentially change things
solar-wide and beyond. Such is the place we find ourselves.

> We seem not to be well-provided with enough foresight to be able to properly
> analyse our actions/decisions at that scale.

Not at first, and not as a group, no. At least not without proper leadership
and/or collective goals, I'm guessing. But who's to say what's best?

> Or, changes are going too fast for us to adapt in time, I don't know.

Concerning the biggest issues, adapting in time might simply be /not/ doing what
we have been doing up 'til now. E.g. don't let capitalism run too rampant, don't
let leaders be unaccountable, stop producing plastics, start mining asteroids,
etc. We have things we can do, I think. Or maybe it's too late now? idk.

> This is food for philosophers and sociologists.

Eh, it's for anyone who wants to explore these ideas. More minds on these issues
couldn't hurt. Most ideas will be ignored, anyway.

> We, as small individuals, cannot do much besides being conscious of what may or
> seems to be happening before our eyes and - at least individually - try to act
> and live consequently. [...]

Ain't that the truth, and it seems to be the most positive course of action.
This world is going to do worldish things, and the best we can do it stay along
for the ride (and at least try to control our own selves the best we can).

> >> Martians, I have been told, have outgrown the problem (which is why they are
extinct)... ;-)
> >
> > Hmm, I would like to know more regarding how something like that would come
> > about...
> >
> I brought this up half-jokingly, but it would be an interesting exercise
> of what-if analysis. I don't feel really up to the task however.

I am only left with guesses about what you meant. Something to do with a total
lack of hierarchies resulting in some kind of anarchy?

> We seem to be drifting slowly away from the initial goal. ;-)

Oops, haha :D

Sam

Post a reply to this message