Staredit Network

I'm not talking about our civilization. I'm not even talking about human civilization. I'm talking about the philosophy of having civilization. Will it amount to anything permanent, or is it just doomed to be only an artificial environment emulated within the constraints of the 'real' one to encapsulate our race while it lasts?


Ducking the obvious religious, existential, or extremist perspectives, I'm just trying to honestly figure out this question. I know it's probably impossibly broad and involves too many unknowns to definitively solved, but what do you think? Do you think the structure of civilization can be made to create its own permanent environment somehow? Do you think civilization is only a transient thing to be used as a means to achieve something greater? Or do you think it's just a big waste of time we're using to lie to ourselves that we're better than nature for as long as we can possibly get away with?


I could honestly use some insight on this one.

And if not civilized, what would we have? Each family to their own acre out in the middle of nowhere?

By bringing large masses of people together, setting down laws for them to follow, and providing them with protection, you give yourself innumerable advantages over the every-creature-for-themselves laws of the natural world.

Always being presented with new things we can acquire (the media) gives the population motivation to work for the greater good of the civilization. You then have taxes to support a government, which in turn pays for a military, education of the youth, and so forth. It's a very stable and efficient system, in my honest opinion.

Well, Nature was the first thing that exsisted (I'm guessing) and it was the thing that Earth started out with and is as long as Earth itself exsists. Then, we evolved and found a way to exsist within Nature itself. We are part of Nature, and we're no better than it, because we evolved from it, and we surpass some parts of Nature, and other parts definitely surpass us.

We're not really lying to ourselves, and not really saying we're better than Nature itself, and I don't know any fool who would say that, and if they do, well you're stupid.

I can't really explain this..it's too complicated. That was the best I could do...sorry.

I think its a calling for something greater.How I came to this conclusion is that when I look at us, and then animals I see that we are smarter, and much more complex then they are. As far as I see it, we are the only predators that SHOULDN'T be predators, and instead be prey. Every predator I've seen has there own natural offensive characteristics (teeth, extrodinary strength, etc...); we have the brain, and thats it. We are the only species that have to rely on our intelligence to survive.

We as humans are in a league of our own since we can take out any species on Earth, thus I believe we need a different environment.Why do we need a different environment? I don't know. Still, I believe that as long as humans are around there will always be civilization whether it be small tribes or large nations.

Well here I'll toss one thought in. We're now reaching a point where things are about to change greatly. The one limit of humanity, that is, humanity itself, is on the verge of being broken thanks to new technologies such as genetics, cybornetics, modern medicine, etc. I might even go as far as to say within 100 years we'll be able to remove our mortality, augment or outright replace bodies, communicate telepathically (no joke! they already have primitive CAT scan-type stuff that can translate brain patterns into words for a display)... among many other things.

I'm wondering if we'll reach a point high enough to be able to define both ourselves and the very rules of our reality itself. Or is it just going to be that no matter how far we go (and by 'we' I refer to our civilization), we'll always just be a reinterpretation of our existing reality.



I'm not sure if that makes sense to you guys, but that's basically what I'm trying to figure out.

How could any person be a fireman, a policeman, a doctor, a chef, a construction worker, etc. all at once? Without civilization, what home would you have?

My definition of civilization is a group that has decieded to expand its expendeture of resources into feilds which would be considered excessive in other situations. An example of this would be personal hygeine, art, or idealology; where your skills could be directed towards other, possibly more beneficial for the current situation, activities.
The concept behind civilization is a society who has expanded itself to encompass long term benefits, and some sort of significant form of expression.
With this in mind there is always a constant in civilizations. This is that there requires to be an excess supply of resources to expend. As long as there is room to expand there will be an increase in civilization. So, in concurrance, I believe that civilization in any one example is limited, yet since there will always be some form of resource somewhere, (as long as the universe doesn't implode or something) the idea of civilization will never die out.

Nature is the universe. Civilization surpassing entire nature seems unlikely.

Civilization is not to expand upon one resource, a resource is a resource. It is to be used upon, to be improved upon, and to create a impenetratable cycle of civilization.
We improve upon natural resources. In the future, people are expecting us to be breathing with a gas-mask. But I don't think that would be necessary. Our civilization has cause us to excessively use up our resources, and cause other planetary needs to stop existing.

However, a civilization is made to control itself, and bring balance or crumble. Which is why we will probably live in our home planet until the sun burns up our planet... or until the universe dies out. Technology will provide us to evade the natural fate of most planets.

Civilization = Nature

I'm not so sure if were to civilized in this age, I mean sure we have the technology we can make the world better, faster, stronger. Deep down though were the same as man when he first "invented" fire. That's just my opinion though.

The longevity of Civilization is entirely dependant of whether or not whatever resides in that civilization has a definant advantage over whatever doesn't. They usually do.

Why must you be so complicated. I don't understand. I guess i believe that.. religion will survive.. I think things happen for a reason.

I really doubt it would be possible to sustain any sort of real "civilization" without the repercussions we face today of killing ourselves and fighting amonst ourselves. We may be able to outsmart natural nature but we'll never outsmart human nature.

Were outsmarting nature? That's interest, last time I checked there are people down South of me who didn't get the message.

We do outsmart both natures. The fact we dominate nature today is proof enough. Human nature is what we are, we dont need to outsmart it. Thats what has kept us alive and driven us to be the dominating force of the planet.

Uhm. We surpass Human Nature and Nature itself? Really. What would you do if our galaxy crashed into another galaxy? It has been spotted to happen you know. Right. "Helpless."
What are you thinking? Have you seen people dying from hurricanes and tornadoes? We still die of natural age and disease. Surely, we havent dominated this "Nature".
Our race is in infancy. Complicated we are, we're still not able to outsmart nature. Nature is lightyears beyond us.

Basically what Lithium said. We havn't outsmart anything, I'm sure all the hurricanes here in the US proves we havn't outsmarted anything.

We've clearly outsmarted nature by studying it. The second you build shelters to escape form the cold you're outsmarting nature. (Although a better term would be evading nature, nature isn't smart.) When we make simple weapons to fight against predators we're still evading nature. It's just the way humans are, the ultimate adaptors.

I concur with Syphon. I've given some thought to TT's civilization problem on my own--philosophy is a bit of a hobby with me.
The way I see it, civilization is going to stick around as long as agriculture does; if not agriculture, then some way of food production that's not hunting-gathering. Agriculture allows one human to grow enough food for many. Therefore, people will realize that not everyone needs to be a farmer. Some of these people will take up other pursuits that will produce goods or services that can be traded for the farmers' produce, such as pottery, basket-weaving, or, interestingly enough, religion: there's no time to be religious when a lion is trying to kill you and you need every minute to find food for your family. Civilization results from surplus.
Another way of looking at it is this. Consider a human as an animal. What do we have in our favor? Not claws, or fangs, or fur, or size. We have intelligence, and that's how we survive. Civilization provides a way to increase the general intelligence without any harm done to everyone. It's a win-win scenario. You tell me how to kill this animal, and I'll tell you how to make something to keep the meat in.

I disagree with the point that we cannot escape nature. Some things are universal, yes, like gravity, and electromagnetism, and the need for light. But think about it for a second. What's the "natural" state of a human being? Sleeping in a cave and eating food raw. Every innovation is a form of escape from nature. Hurricanes and disease--take note, Lithium--may devastate humans. But we rebound. We rebuild what the hurricane destroys. Nature may damage us, but it won't destroy us. Disease--what about antibiotics? We've conquered many forms of disease already. "But people still die of them!" Well, yes. But we're working on it. "What would happen if another galaxy crashed into ours?" That's not likely to happen soon, and by the time it does we'll probably have some way of surviving it. Advances come exponentially. It took millions of years to invent writing, then thousands for the computer, tens for the personal computer, and quite a bit shorter for the internet.

If you mean human nature, of course we can't. It's part of us, for better or for worse.

What exactly is a civilized world.

One with Bush behind bars. *hits the drum, buh dum ch*

In definition it is a world with a preffered society over simple wilderness.

A civilized world is basically a world in which the dominant species is free to make living choices.

Well, I guess we're alrdy civilized then.

Yes, we are. That should be fairly obvious.

Nay!!!Well, eventually every civilization falls...its a fact not opinion. Hopefully I don't live to see that lol. Not saying I want to die quick, sayin that the civilization shouldn't die for another good 200 years.

I wish we had a golden age.....
*dreams bout some other stuff*

EDIT:Oops...hadn't read the first post right...

New:Still nay, cause when natural resources are gone and world is used up...we go BOOM BOOM! If we live through that...what happens when the sun blows up? We dead, and if we live through that............

Actually you interpreted what TT said incorrectly on both attempts.