America and Europe have been no better. It was only 300 years ago that Americans burned witches at the stake. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, Europe crippled Africa and the Middle East with their so-called nation building that ignored centuries of tribal realities.
So what?
When we consider the world today and try to comprehend the massive failures of virtually every foreign policy initiative by all countries for improvements, we should recognize that, for all our best intentions, human beings simply do not have the ability to accomplish great goals. Recent studies in neurology, psychology, economics, and other fields make it clear that emotions and primitive urges are much more powerful than either the rational or conscious parts of our minds. The 18th Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, the belief that human beings could harness the power of our rational minds has been revealed to be a myth.
We do stand on the edge of a precipice, but I've come to realize that we have always stood there. It is not a new phenomenon. Most cannot even see the precipice; it is too terrifying to imagine. Others believe that technology and the illusion of control over it will provide a bridge.
I no longer know what to believe, but I also now question my own fears that homo sapiens is simply another in a series of failed experiments by nature. It's not that I have more hope; it's rather that, looking backwards, I can't find an historical period when we were any better.
That is not to say that one should succumb to despair and cease all efforts at improvements. Human beings do have good qualities, not the least of which is a fundamental optimism — perhaps unreasonable but nonetheless valuable. Despair is tantamount to submission: We have always been and will always been three steps from the cave. Progress is futile.
I can't accept that. We must never stop trying to create a more just, equitable world, but perhaps we'll have more success if we realize how much of our own barbarism we have to overcome to achieve it.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dan Rocha
Believe what you want, but for me it appears that humanity has improved slowly, but steadily since the classical Greeks. Ups and downs--yes, but overall there is less suffering.
2 - Mark Schannon
Dan,
I appreciate your point of view. There's no way to scientifically prove either your view or mine. How does one measure civility, civilizaation, humanity, etc. over time? Can't be done.
I hope it turns out you're right & I'm wrong, but we'll both probably not be around to see it.
3 - Frances
It feels like someone else just joined the club *grin*.
We call it 'Earth' and it should have been called 'Garden'.
There was enough room for everyone, enough food for everyone, endless possibilities and a way to achieve everything we wanted.
What do we end up with: a slave world where the riches of the entire planet are divided up among a very few people while billions [at this point] are not allowed to seek for themselves a better life, where they are not allowed to earn a decent days' pay for a hard day's work.
We excel in astounding abundance in the art of misery, the only infinite resource we know. Half of our species is deemed inferior [just sit down for a while and -imagine- that if you can] and has to endure endless abuse for the most trivial and inconsequential of reasons. What utter tragedy, what bottomless despair to do this to ourselves.
I wholeheartedly disagree with the '3 steps away from the cave' theory. The BBC had a show where a iron age community had to fend for themselves using nothing but what the iron agers had. To help them along [quite reasonably] they had 4 day's worth of supplies.
When the supplies ran out [as they knew they would] the whole game came tumbling down with shocking immediacy. They had no idea how to live with basically nothing. They were put into a survival situation and they could not cope. There are peoples who civilization hasn't met yet. These people still live in the cave. That's 1 step away from us. 1, not 3.
We are capable of greatness but we defeat ourselves with trivialities. We don't teach our children what it means to be a human. We are the -only- species on this planet with feelings of shame towards sexuality. We simply refuse to accept our own basic needs as we work ourselves to death to get money to buy stuff we won't have a chance to enjoy.
We are spiritually empty and morally corrupt.
But we've got HDTV. Pity us not.
4 - lofi
I'm in the bath right now, switching between browsing the web and staring at my testicles
its to not know humanity to deny the splendour of the animal
5 - Paotie
Mark -
Great article. I agree with Dan - change is slow in coming, probably too slow at times, though I appreciate your perspective, anyway.
6 - SFC SKI
"The 18th Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, the belief that human beings could harness the power of our rational minds has been revealed to be a myth." I don't know that it was a belief so much as it was an attempt to get people to strive to use reason against instinct.
One can bemoan the state of humanity, or one can go out and try to help someone else, and lead by example. Sure sounds like a Kum-ba-ya Hallmark sentiment, but what does bitching accomplish?
7 - sr
lofi. Please tell me your not pluged into an electrical outlet while browsing on your PC taking a bath. You wont have testicles to stare at but burnt grapes.
8 - Ryan
Mark, you couldn't be any closer to the truth if you tried. But unlike you this pleases me, I hope humanity destroys itself sooner than later so the world can be resorted.
9 - SFC SKI
If the planet is depopulated, who will go to these resorts?
10 - Mark Schannon
Ryan, you're even more gloomy than I! I could do an article about the nobility one can find in the human species and argue that we deserve a chance to make things right.
That was my point with Dan. The state of humanity is not something that can be known from a rational or intellectual perspective, it's only something that is observed and felt--understanding that we filter everything we observe through our own unconscious beliefs, biases, attitudes, etc. A great conundrum.
And SFC SKI, one should absolutely try to take one or two more steps, to go out and lead by example or at least do good. I only describe what I see; my goal is that we can fight and overcome the problem that we've evolved as organisms slower than our technology.
One should never give up. And one should always rememer,
In Jameson Veritas
11 - gonzo marx
bah...yer base thesis is invalidated by the very notion of population expansion that ya cite
can't get ta 6 billion people when the barbarians rule, cuz they tend to kill off folks they don't like
not ta mention disease, natural disasters, and famine...
you know, those 4 Horsemen
if those are kept in check enough that population expands, and quality of individual life improves, no matter how slightly, on a year by year basis...rather than deteriorating (like in say, Iraq)...then the human animal is progressing by the only criteria that counts
survival of numbers
anything else is artificial construct in the great scheme of things...
but ya knew that
just fer you, Mark...:::waves:::
the Tao of D'oh.
Excelsior?
12 - alessandro Nicolo
Great read.
Mark, it doesn't necessarily have to be proven scientifically. But I suspect it can be; just look at the medical advancement we've seen. That is part of "civilization" no?
Historians can tell you that we have been steadily improving. Heck, once upon a time we used to eat onions like it was an apple.
On the other hand, people still pick their noses at the dinner table.
So I see your point but I tend to see life as a glass half full. Why I have no clue. It's genetic maybe.
John Stuart Mill? Bah. I'm reading something that's keeping me on the edge of the toilet seat. Something called the Hardy Boys. Ever hear of them?
13 - High Heels
#7
sr
Here we have the dichotomy of the article in a nutshell --- you warned him about the danger; I laughed aloud at the thought. I'd expect nothing less of a humane man like yourself, and I'm disappointed in (but not surprised at all at) myself. ;) HH
14 - Mark Schannon
Gonzo, you rapscallion, you're going to equate quantity with quality? The more people we cram onto this planet, the better things are?
And it's an assumption that quality of life improves year-by-year. Reality shows alone disprove that falacy.
Bah, humbug. And all the best to you & yer missus.
alesandro, there's no question but that our science and technology have improved in quantum leaps since the first cave person said, "hey, these round things could be useful." But, underneath the thin veneer of civilization lies the unconscious, brain-wired, longings, anger, urges, irrationality of cave people.
It's not like homo sapiens are bad--it's just that brain evolution takes a lot longer than a few hundred thousand years. Just think of Paris Hilton, LOL.
And to all...
In Jameson Veritas
15 - Christopher Rose
You're a bit out on your timeline, Mark. Homo Sapiens has only been around for 20,000 years or so. As a species we're just getting started!
16 - Temple Stark
Alcohol kills brain cells.
Is it an evolutionary force or a devolutionary force? Self-destructism achieves the goal of its master.
- Temple
17 - sr
Temple, Just let evolutionary force do the work for us. Kick back and watch animal planet with some suds and popcorn and dont worry. We are only what we evolve into. Just dont blame me.
18 - Mark Schannon
Christopher, I keep getting banned word strangled so I'll make this simple, I hope. Humans have been around for approx 200,000 years. I'd add the website but that may be what messed that up before.
Temple, my dear sir, it has been known since people first squeezed juice out of grapes that alcohol is the great enabler of truth, justice, and the homo sapien way. That it may mar a few brain cells is a small price to pay for brilliance. So there!
In Jameson Veritas
19 - gonzo marx
and Mark, i ain't saying quantity equates to quality
what i'm saying is that barbarism and the 4 Horsemen , when running rampant, tend to cull the herd and keep the population low
current population figures would show that such is not happening
if living conditions and such were indeed deteriorating as you state, then population would be decreasing rather than increasing...Q.E.D.
now, tipple another wee dram, me boyo..all me best ta you and the Missus
Excelsior?
20 - Christopher Rose
Mark, yes you're kind of right, up to a point. I'm currently re-reading Bill Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything. When you made your earlier comment I was co-incidentally reading the part where he writes about our origins. He states that "modern Europeans... are descended from no more than a few hundred Africans who left their homeland as recently as 25,000 years ago".
Homo Sapiens has indeed been around for a couple of hundred thousand years now, although mostly doing nothing significant for most of that time. We're still very much the new kids on the block though as our immediate ancestors such as Homo Erectus or Homo Neanderthalensis were around for a couple of million years before disappearing almost overnight, despite being bigger and stronger than us and in the case of Neanderthalensis, having a larger brain.
21 - sr
WHAT CRAP.
22 - Dr Dreadful
What crap?
23 - sr
Hey Doc what crap do you wont to know?
24 - gonzo marx
Christopher raises a decent point for examination
if, as what he quotes posits that modern man evolved from a few hundred Africans 25,000 years ago..then one must ask some Questions...
to wit - since the "Iceman" was dated to approximately 7,000 years ago, this leaves about 18,000 years for many evolutionary changes to occur... blue eyes and the loss of a thigh muscle for Europeans, the epicanthic fold as well as the thigh muscle issue for Asians...among other things like melanin content/pigmentation and hair
all these changes via evolution in a mere 18,000 years, which bred true in the meantime with NO further evolutionary changes?
doesn't make sense according to what we have as evidence pertaining to evolutionary timelines and biology
but i digress
Excelsior?
25 - troll
so...there is a Santa Clause - ?