When will humans achieve the next stage of evolution and do away with concepts like "country" and "money"?

Question

These are old and archaic concepts that inhibit humanity's technological progress.

Answer 1

Actually, there's nothing "wrong" per se with the ideas of "country" (as in nation-state) or "money" (as in unit of trade). Both are necessary if not inevitable things.....as has been said already, people find life really hard without some sense of community (a label to go by) or a means to trade for the things they themselves cannot provide (with actual barter being way more hassle than it is worth usually).

The *real* issue is...."Country" and "Money" end up being tools that are used and then abused by those who have given way too much free reign to their most aggressive, territorial and competitive natures. Things that are tools in the hands of ordinary people become *weapons* in the hands of the cutthroat. This is even true of chiimpanzees out in nature--they have their own primitive methods of politics and mutual back-scratching, but those go entirely out the window when it comes to the hormonal issues of *MATING*. Where testosterone, the hormone responsible for that aggression, that competitive side, that territorial urge, becomes the factor that overrides reason and common sense.

So am I saying that people need castrating? ^_^ Hell no, that would be *very flagrantly* anti-survival in any species.

But in order for any kind of socially or intellectually advanced "utopia" to really take root and flourish, what would need to happen is for human nature to undergo a literal "sea change" that causes the hormonal side of our psychology to *reinforce* our social and/or intellectual natures and not *sabotage* them instead with increased "cutthroat" tendencies. The living, biological energies that go *into* being aggressive and selfish would have to somehow be reversed into instead fostering altruism and cooperation (or a group mentality).

Catch is: I don't see this happening too oftten in nature until and unless you count eusocial animals, like Naked Mole Rats or honeybees or termites. You know, animals for which environmental severity has *forced* an inbred level of *dependent* sociality that sacrifices the individual species member for the good of the "brood". But it is interesting to note that with one exception (termites), most eusocial animals develop *female led* broods.

So what do I see happening? Well.....what we need and what's out there are two separate things.

--What we need, somehow, is to find a way to exploit human neoteny of prolonged immaturity to *extend* the childhood state of cerebral plasticity, that adaptibility of mind. Meaning, we end up with a *brain bio-chemistry* for a longer period of time, that favors a) quicker, more efficient learning of raw data, and b) also a mind that is more likely to *sublimate* or re-direct sexual and aggressive urges into something more intellectual, at least with the right *guidance*....

However, even under ideal circumstances this would promote a prolonged state of cerebral *infantilism* in other ways too, in essence trading raw intellect (the positive) for emotional instability (the negative) and immaturity (the other one).

--And circumstances are *far from ideal* in this regard. What I see out there is instead the opposite of this: children are growing up way too fast, physically and socially. Kids in the 8-10 year old range are acting more like teenagers. And this doesn't even count any side effects from premature puberty courtesy of things like pollution or Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone in milk. Nor does this count the trend in P.E. classes of the *school athletes* or jocks getting bigger and more muscular--growing up basically--younger and younger.

And....we've been way too remiss in terms of public education and youth counseling. The guidance just isn't there, not even to counter *current negative trends*, never mind establish any *new positive ones*. We've been losing ground on this one for years if not *decades.*

So am I saying evolution won't happen? No. ^_^ Our species is *long* overdue for changes to our genome, the last "human mutations" that came regarding "brain size" were 14,000 and 5,000 years ago roughly, if the site below is any indication:

http://www.sciencenews.org/

Really, look it up. I put the search phrases in quotes for you and everything in the paragraph above. ^_^

But it is like other people have said: Evolution isn't pro-"progress" or pro-"utopia". It is *pro-survival*. As in "survival of the fittest". As in, once you spawn young of your own and propogate that DNA, evolution *doesn't Care* what *you* do as an individual, once you've reproduced successfully, you can live, die, whatever, it isn't *as* relevant as the *act of* reproductive success. Granted, this is softened a bit in social species like ourselves, but not by too much...

So yeah, in the end, evolution doesn't really *care* either way about technologies or societies. It really is concerned ONLY with spreading successful DNA.

Hope this helps....and thanks for your time! ^_^ Good Question!

Answer 2

You are assuming evolution is entirely positive and that its progress has a definitive outcome. Evolution is merely the combination of random mutations with external stimuli. Sharks and crocodiles have remained the SAME for millenia because there has been no environmental stimulus strong enough to cause them to change. Indeed, evolution has always maintained a balance between cooperation and competition -- lifeforms will never achieve an "enlightened" nirvana because what you call "archaic" is natural and is encoded in almost all species: desires, ambition, and the need to satiate one's individual wants. I believe one should focus more on the day-to-day kindnesses and cooperations rather than bemoan that society has not "evolved". Evolution may spur us to be an even more fragmented and competitive society should the external stimuli so lead us along that path. Just my opinion.

Answer 3

Even if you got rid of the concept of country, little would change. It's in people's nature to want to label and group people. People develop roots in their community and take pride in it...regardless of whether or not it is named. Some people are proud to be American, others proud to be from the southern states, etc.... You can group by country, by race, by religion, by height or eye color but the greater ideal isn't to rid the world of the concept of countries but to stop labeling people.

Money will always be around because it is difficult and inefficient to provide entirely for one's own needs. A farmer might be great a growing food but not at building the machinery he needs to cultivate the land. A mechanic might be able to build a machine but not sew his own clothing. The only way to facilitate a fair and consistent exchange of goods and services is through money...otherwise the farmer is stuck hoping he can find a mechanic who wants the type of food he's growing and the mechanic will hope that someone who makes clothes also needs some machinery repaired.

It would be nice if everyone would do everything out of the goodness of their heart but in the end there will always be more need to fill than there are people to fill it. A society based on money or exchange rewards people who bring something to the table the society perceives as valuable. If you have nothing to contribute...you go without.

Answer 4

Excellent question! I think about this kind of thing often and find it very inspiring, but realistically, no...not so much. :(

Money (or power over others) has always been strived for among the human race; millionaires, politicians, Rome, all the way back to start of civilization. I think it goes back to Darwin: competition and being alpha male. This seems to be the biggest underlying problem.
And greed, greed seems to be compulsive rather than just a bad trait. A small taste of money or power only makes people crave more. Even people that grew up humbly, once they come into a lot of money, they seem to abandon all of those concepts that they grew up with.

I do see your concept though, it would be nice to travel without rules and regulations, and not have to work in such a generic fashion just to feed your family. It seems we've greatly complicated the basic requirements of life.

Unfortunately, I think we will likely encounter a near apacolyptic scenario before our current laws of society are changed.

Answer 5

In 1984

Answer 6

GREAT question. I 've got to give you a star for this one.

Going back some thirty years when I was dragged up. Society used to be about people. Yep! we actually cared what happened to our friends, neighbours etc. But today, we only care about money. Of course I'm being very general in my comments but I'm sure you'll undersatnd where I'm coming from.

So to answer the question..... I don't think we ever will. I beleive we will wipe ourselves out long before we can put some humanity back into out society. God I hope I'm wrong but I cannot see it happening the way we're going.
I do hope I wasn't to depressive. Sorry!

Answer 7

I'm sure it will happen at some point, but something massive will have to happen. Sending the planet into chaos. As it is right now, those in power are the ones with all the money. There's no way they would give it up to reform society. It will have to be taken from them. Be it war, huge economy crash and famine, whatever. Something huge would have to happen and a new kind of leader would have to come about.

Answer 8

When pigs fly, and happy faeries shower you with money just for being you. Oh, sorry, no more money. But, then, without money, there will be no inventions, consumer products, medicine, etc.

So you can enjoy your happy utopia, sitting in your cave, well not actually "your cave" since you won't be able to own anything, and you can stare at the walls until you die from some disease. Woohoo!!!

Answer 9

never

unless you noticed, earning a poopload of money is the key motivation for technological progress. Soviet Union tried doing innovation "for the benefit of humanity" - all they invented was AK-47 and RPG.

Answer 10

Never if things keep going at the rate they are tday. Everyone is greedy and just cares about money.