Dr. Stephen Hawking: "In a world that is in chaos politically, socially and environmentally..."?

Question

Ciao!

An AP article regarding Mr. Hawking's question drew me in.

I want to say that I think it's spectacular that nearly 17,000 people have answered so far. What I am concerned for is the overwhelming pessimism from the majority of the answers.

Here is (are) my question(s):

Do we really live in a time when hope is fleeting and the world is becoming blind to the beauty of mystery? Is the human race or, at least, western culture more pessimistic now than in the past? Do we truly believe that we are doomed? If so, why do we feel this way?

xox
good jen

Answer 1

i)we live in a material world(as madonna once said)so beauty takes second berth to fortune.
ii)who says hello to strangers and can trust their neighbours.pessimism born from fear,maybe.
iii)a century is a long time and if our materials don`t kill us(e.g.nuclear weapons,ozone-destroying products)then perhaps mother nature will just decide to `fold` on us.
i am an optimistic person.

Answer 2

It's all in the eyes of the beholder....people's attitudes, perspectives, ideas, choices/decisions make up our social reality.

I don't think we necessarily live in a time where hope is fleeting, it may feel that way sometimes but you can look at the positive side of things too.

There is a growing environmental awareness in developed countries and we live in an age where there is so much information (a lot of it is superficial, however you can find some amazing ideas/'facts' about the world).

I actually haven't read the article you're talking about but i still think there are a variety of different ways you can look at the world and/or at the future of our planet.

There has always been some form of chaos around the world however, there are also forces that 'balance' the world as well!

'Western Culture': well i would say that western culture is changing...mixing with other cultures, as well as influencing and changing other cultures around the world.

I guess from reading some people's responses before that they believe the humanity is doomed...and they (as well as you?) may feel that way because many social/environmental/political problems seem to be on-going or 'unsolved'. If people became more active in their lives they may not feel so pessimistic.
OR
We should become more passive, but passive in the Buddhist way...which i won't really explain here (see book below...)

People can't be optimistic all the time, but i think we as individuals need to think about different possibilities before we just give up and say the world is doomed!

Answer 3

I think there's a lot of beauty in the world but some people want to spoil it. I think the future is very scary.

I answered Stephen's question but you probably won't find it amongst the other 30000 or whatever answers he got so here it is below (it's not the best answer but it's the best I could think of)-

'Nuclear weapons need to be eliminated completely because if not world war 3 will be a lot worse than world war 2 ever was.
People will survive, but it probably won't be a world anyone wants to live in. I hate to say it, but I think the human race is one of the worst things to happen to the Earth, no other species treat each other with as little respect and compassion.

By the way, I hope this doesn't sound flippant, but I loved your guest appearance in the Simpsons.'

Answer 4

Most of our worlds problems have been created by individuals that have too much time, money or power. This affords them the time to dream up schemes that will feed their lust for self worth.

There is no easy answer because no one is omniscient and there are many facets to this problem. The only thing that I do know is that a philosophy of preservation and regeneration needs to be preached to the new generation in every country across the world. We need to globalize the concept of sharing to include the earth and all natural resources. As long as $$$$ drives our governments and our globalism increases our interdependency it will become less likely that we will be able to remove the lust for money and achieve any sort of equilibrium. Why do people have to retire? I don't think that old persons want to retire but rather they want to be able to assume new paying responsibilities. Why does a government need to support slackers? Everyone thinks that unlimited unemployment is an entitlement. Without the ongoing struggle an equilibrium cannot be achieved. Daily achievements foster good mental health and as a result minimize megalomania and detrimental behaviors.

My kids are entering their teenage years and I hope that they can find a way along with their peers to correct this problem. I do not want them dreading to have children of their own even if they can afford them.

Answer 5

The same question could have been asked about the human race 101 years ago. Or for that matter during the Crusades, WWII, and many other 'rough spots' for the human race.

Humans will survive as long as the planet allows us, that's not the point. The point is: in what condition will we survive? That, nobody can know. We've dipped into 'dark ages' before and it could happen again. Or we could flourish and through the gift of technology, learn to communicate with everyone else around the world and foster understanding.

We'll see.

Answer 6

Its really hard to say whether or not humans will run out of food to eat or maybe things which we need that is important won't be there to extend another100 years. Such as fuels to run cars. Nobody can imagine how it will be like after another century, the population will increase and of course it will be a huge problem.
So now if we get rid of those nuclear weapons , I am sure after decades people will finally see that killing each other makemore people die. Like in wars and battles. I believe since we started to exist in this world, there were gradually more damages to the environments. Destroying animals habitat. I mean if we keep on continuing what we are doing now, who knows how we will survive decades after. The world will be a chaos!

Answer 7

Ironically, humans must get over, put an end to, the current and predominant acceptance of biblical doctrine(s) and all other faith-based ideologies around the globe-associated and otherwise. The "Bible" and its extremes of moralism, violence and fear is killing us as a whole and is the most dangerous obstacle to the peace that would otherwise be completely achievable among nations. This is true because it is so blindly accepted as truth by so many humans willing to put binding constraints on others. A self-fulfilling prophecy, it is most dangerous. Humans need to move forward without these "my God is right and my afterlife is at stake" brain crushers. Only then will international cooperation occur.
In the Bible, (esp. New Testament) I only read the "red parts". I don't think Jesus would fight anyone, certainly not for the ignorance of territoriality or resource gathering. Religions perpetuate ignorance; ignorance is blindness.
The man Jesus was not a religion. Humans created that religion around him, but, surprisingly, (well, not really) his teachings and advice, like those of all peaceful men and women to come after, are grossly ignored by devoted "followers".
Bottom line: Peace and acceptance of others is all about love and respect.

Answer 8

I think overall we are more pessimistic than in the past. The reason is because we've lost focus on the things that are truly important in life. No it isn't money, fancy cars, or having the best global economy. It's having food on the table and loved ones to share it with.

We've taken the focus away from survival. We've made incredible advances in medicine and science, technology and innovation. But what we've failed to do is to prepare ourselves for the sacrificies that these advances bring. Sacrifices of the environment and sacrifices of quiet surroundings, and simple solutions. Somehow by making everything easier for ourselves, we made things more difficult.

I don't think we're doomed. I don't think hope is fleeting. But I do think we've lost a lot, and it seems we have a lot more to lose, before we finally get smart, and go back to a balanced, simple, centered, and non-destructive way of life.

Answer 9

The human race is not doomed. Western society is probably doomed.

First what would it take to destroy the entire human race? I can think of only one thing and that would be if we evolved into a new species. Although we'd be gone, it wouldn't be thought of as destruction.

An asteroid strike could possibly do it, but somewhere there is probably someone who has planned for that - a bunker with food, water, health supplies, sun lamps and quite a few generators might do the trick.

Disease hasn't wiped out everyone and probably won't. There are plenty of small islands that would remain totally unaffected.

There are currently no crazy leaders with enough nuclear capacity to wipe out the human race. Keeping the rest of the world poor and uneducated probably keeps them and us safe. For example, no one has an interest in attacking most of Africa and it has no ability to attack us.

By looking at the circumstances surrounding the extinction of other species, it becomes fairly clear that the human species is likely to continue.

Civilization has never progressed this far and has never changed this rapidly. Progress probably moves forward like evolution, but it seems that we are in a "progress bubble." We have advanced so rapidly and apparently made ourselves more vulnerable to a downfall.

If a plague wipes out 25% of a primitive population, 75% of the population still remains live with the same conditions.

Western civilization is threatened because it relies on economic stability, something that is vulnerable to attack. When the terrorists brought down the twin towers, we went into an economic recession. Although the attack was shocking due to the lack of provocation, it was a relatively small attack.

If September 11th gave us a recession, what will destroy our economy? Well, a plague capable of wiping out 25% of our population, might do the trick as everyone goes into quarantine and the economy grinds to a halt. War could bankrupt the economy as sophisticated weaponry is pricey. A few nuclear attacks strategically placed to damage the global economy would also be effective.

Tracing the history of disease and war points toward destruction of human life. Looking at the new economy, it also seems to point toward the destruction of the global economy and as a result Western Society as we know it.

Answer 10

We cannot, at least not most of us. Humans tend to be one of the least intelligent creatures on the planet, to paraphrase a line out of the Matrix, we are a virus. We continue to spread and spread until our host organism, the earth, is dead or we die out. The oceans are nearly fished out, pollution is out of control and our own government isn't doing anything about it - same for global warming. We stand a good chance of nuking each other to death and those of us unfortunate enough to survive will no doubt die off in the after effects. Not to be morbid but I think this is a really good thing for the planet if 75% of us died off in the next 100-125 years. The people remaining hopefully will have a better clue on how to get along, say on par with that of the average chipmunk, and won't trash the world so bad after it repairs itself. If you want to give the world a fighting chance, make it so no child is born in the next ten years that is capable of having a child themselves. We have to slow population, we have to stop consuming our resources. We are past the point of using more than the planet can create and have been for quite sometime. We are spending down our environmental piggy bank and soon we'll be bankrupt. I have a very dark outlook for the planet and starting about 50 years from now I would not want to be alive, thankfully I won't be.

Answer 11

Yes, Virginia, there is hope for the world to continue. To feel differently is both myopic and self-centrist. Today's chaos is not much different from any other chaos in the history of man. From an American perspective, was life much less fearful during World War II with wars on two fronts, rampant discrimination against those of different races, and a common practice of dumping toxic chemicals into lakes and streams to dispose of them? Was it less chaotic when a trip across country involved possible deadly attack by Indians, shooting buffalo to rot in the sun for the pure sport of it, packing a sidearm in case of trouble in dirt-paved streets? I think that Americans feel most keenly that the world is in chaos when they have a elected a president that does not lead with confident vision. But we've had several presidents like this who thought that they were fighting the good fight at the same time that opinion polls expressed nothing but frustration and disdain. So yes, Virginia, there is hope for mankind, and it is the human condition to live in chaos and misery but for the few precious moments when man managed to raise his above the muck and then quickly retreat.