The Dumbing of Civilization

P

PsychoticEpisode

It is very dry in here today
Valued Senior Member
Despite science and all its wonderful discoveries there seems to be a levelling off or even a regression of sorts in regards to intelligence. Has scientific knowledge reached a point where normal IQ's are having trouble with it?

I'll admit that I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but I do my best to try and understand scientific breakthroughs. Is it just me or is there a feeling that the more complex science gets the more people tend to give credence to a supreme being? And its not just the complexity of science....things like world events, politics and society to name a few are also mindnumbing to sort out at times.

It could be that every civilization tends to reach a level of scientific achievement that the ordinary citizen can no longer comprehend. I'm suggesting that the alternative is religion. Maybe religion is a refuge for the non-comprehending masses because life is simply overwhelming to most, I don't know. Religion appears to be simplicity and much easier to attach oneself to.

Once a civilization embraces religion as part of everything from education to politics does it stifle growth of intelligence or at least slow it down? Does science become a realm for a privileged few? Is it just me or has the actual scientist lost the stature they once owned? It seems as if the reverence they once enjoyed is gone and they are viewed somewhat as people doing the work of the devil or pursuing things they'll never find.

Science forums are inundated with religious afficionados, creationists are in the classroom, religious wars, politics and religion seem to be at the forefront of major altercations.

I think we're going backwards.
 
I think what you are seeing is the sqeezing of the "god of the gaps".

You see... religions are often guilty of attempting to be epistemological systems, rather than an ontological system that pretends to know what is beyond the reach of other ontological theories. Put simply... it tries to be a science, when it should stick to mysticism.

As such, it is subject to a squeezing as science progresses. Each new discovery, sheds some light into one of the formerly dark corners in which superstition used to preside. These are the gaps in our current understanding in which religion attempts to make its home.

Unfortunately for religious systems that tread in this territory, the number of dark corners keep getting fewer and further between. Science keeps answering questions better than religion could, and supplanting it in the process. This is creating some overlap now that only a few gaps remain, and religion is getting a mighty squeeze. This is why you see two related phenomenon.

First, you see the secularization of theism. More and more believers today look at the Bible as allegory, rather than literal history. Go back 100 years and you would be shocked to see the proportions that accepted the literal truth of the Bible. This is the effect of the squeezing.

Second, you see the mystification of the secular. As theists run out of dark corners of ignorance in which to hide, they are attempting more and more bold escapades into the bright lights of logic. The only way they can tolerate this, though, is to cling to the fringes of science. Adopt the language of the scientific method, but ignore all of its progress which denies theistic belief. That is why pseudo-science gets more popular while congregations shrink. They substitute one god for another that seems more plausible, more in line with current theory.

It is also why you see so many people in this forum attempt to use fringe science to back up their faith. I don't think people are getting dumber, I just think they are getting sloppy with how they attempt to cover it up.
 
swivel said:
It is also why you see so many people in this forum attempt to use fringe science to back up their faith. I don't think people are getting dumber, I just think they are getting sloppy with how they attempt to cover it up.
Click to expand...

The scary part for me is just how much religions influence the political arena. I hope that the ultimate tragedy, say in 100 years, is that a world power under a religious mandate doesn't end up using deadly force to get what they want. It appears we are heading that way, this I find, is dumb.

I'm equating religious violence with absolute regressive thinking. The more science pushes the more likely religion will strike back. Guns and bombs, death and destruction are all entwined with religious doctrine and accepted by followers. This is also dumb.
 
Last edited:
I agree with you, but I am an optimist (as any student of history must be). I understand that Bush scares secularists, but the trend overall has been for a less parochial society. Each generation is more tolerant of the previous. But each generation is doomed to view itself as having some special status, and being present for the "end of times".

I assure you, things were much worse 50 years ago, 100 years ago, 150 years ago... on back.

And unless we have a coup, which would be very difficult in a world of instantaneous communication and public awareness, the fear of losing their jobs will keep politicians all doing the same old stuff. I don't see much difference between the political parties these days anyway. I know people love to pretend that with Gore in office in '00 that we wouldn't be in a war in Iraq, but that ignores the fact that we had a Republican congress, and a public screaming for blood. I think the pressure was on Bush to act with restraint, to not appear to be the radical righty we take him to be... the pressure on Gore would have been to act with some gall and backbone, to not be the wimpy leftist we take him to be.

We live in a world where parties are interchangeble. Where the Republican party of Lincoln can be the high-taxation big-government party of the North and the Urban, while the Democrats were the conservative slave-owning southerners who wanted small government and low tariffs.

More recently, we had Bush Sr. losing re-election due to a tax raise, and Sen. Kennedy overseeing the deregulation of a ton of industries. You had Clinton signing free-trade agreements, and Bush signing massive welfare spending in the form of medicare prescription. Sort that out.

If you belong to a political party, you have just picked a side, and have to stick with them as they slog through their various routines of oxymoron and hypocrasy.

So if you think who is in office has much play on what takes place, I have some nice land to sell ya. :) The reality is much more sickening than that... what you really have is a system where the politicians keep us so mad at the party we don't belong to, that we are sure to keep voting for the same sleezeballs in the party we affiliate with. They just play us off of one another, and meanwhile, they make their decisions not on any party line, but according to which lobbyist took them to the nicest resturaunt.

Fear not, my friend. They play their game, while science marches on, making the world a better and brighter place for all. I would rather be a poor person today than a king of 200 years ago, without hesitation or question. That is how improved our standard of living is in comparison. And today we have near-perfect social and economic mobility, and many parachutes for emergencies.
 
ITS NOT RELIGIONS FAULT.

the blame lies in all of us as a species.... we have in the development of the modern world, given in to our vanities, and greed, and lust for things.

We devote to much of our brains limited capacity to stupid worthless things.

-MT
 
There is truth in that. We have botox injections for your forehead, but no cure for cancer yet.
 
We devote to much of our brains limited capacity to stupid worthless things.
Click to expand...

LIke participating in forums?

Despite science and all its wonderful discoveries there seems to be a levelling off or even a regression of sorts in regards to intelligence. Has scientific knowledge reached a point where normal IQ's are having trouble with it?
Click to expand...

Blame it on the MTV generation. Doodwhere'smycar idiots. I don't think we are geting dumb, I think we are getting our youth too involved in pop culture, it's the intention of governments to keep people stupid. How else do you think a bunch of idiots vote for such an idiot as Bush? Cause he and others like him manipulate the desires and motives of a majority, and the majority unfortunately are a bunch of idiots, that live by religious indoctrinations and pop culture icons. These people are easily led, manipulated by fear, and an establishment of perpetual war, to keep the government ever getting more power, and less individual/ civil rights.

Heck I don't knw I'm drunk... :D

Godless
 
Godless said:
Damn idiot your using one
Click to expand...

I love calling someone an idiot, right beside the misuse of your/you're. :eek:

I forgive you if you are drunk.... but I don't forgive you for being drunk. :p

Much love.


lightgigantic said:
What are the examples of progress of contemporary science?
Click to expand...

When you say contemporary, how recent does it have to be? Should we thank science for giving us Insulin, antibiotics, immunizations of all sorts, and then tell science to "go to hell, we are done with you"?

It was science that figured out that certain types of blood exists, and are compatible with mixed results, leading to a donation and storage system that saves lives every day. Of course, you may say that saving lives is not a noble purpose, avoiding most of my examples.

What about quality of life? Is happiness a noble cause? Because contrary to fanciful thinking, people were not happier before the industrial revolution. They lived on farms in squalor and had almost no leisure time. The entire arc of human existence was a miserable slog through hunger and pain, with little to ever look forward to. The life of humans, 3000 years ago, was more akin to the life of an animal, than to the life that we are aware of. It was violent and nasty. All existence was about feeding and fucking and fighting.

When you look back over ancient history, from 40,000 years ago up to today, all you see is the constant betterment of the human condition. And not subjectively. That isn't to say that there aren't costs. Everything has costs and benefits. But pointing to smog, and the World Wars of last century, and whatever other ills perturb you does not erase the far greater benefits.

There always seems to be two types of people, the ones that only look at the costs, and the ones that only look at the benefits. The reality is that a slight calculation is required, and I don't think you could ever stack the equation in a way that the costs come out ahead.
 
Even a genius, can come off like an idiot when discussion things and subjects he has never heard of and knows nothing about.

-MT
 
lightgigantic said:
What are the examples of progress of contemporary science?
Click to expand...
The progress of comtemporary science in medicine is breathtaking. Or perhaps I should say breath-giving, since it allows more of us to live longer, healthier, more comfortable lives.
 
Godless said:
Damn idiot your using one
Click to expand...

So now you have to establish how computers have improved our quality of life .....

Did you know that most internet downloads (over 60%) are related to the transmission of pornographic material?
 
When you say contemporary, how recent does it have to be? Should we thank science for giving us Insulin, antibiotics, immunizations of all sorts, and then tell science to "go to hell, we are done with you"?


It was science that figured out that certain types of blood exists, and are compatible with mixed results, leading to a donation and storage system that saves lives every day. Of course, you may say that saving lives is not a noble purpose, avoiding most of my examples.
Click to expand...

So in otherwords, thanks to science, people no longer die and live jolly lives - we may be becoming more "advanced" but if you examine the WHO statistics for persons who are the most happy the top countries always seem to be ones like Bangladesh and Mexico - why?

What about quality of life? Is happiness a noble cause? Because contrary to fanciful thinking, people were not happier before the industrial revolution. They lived on farms in squalor and had almost no leisure time. The entire arc of human existence was a miserable slog through hunger and pain, with little to ever look forward to. The life of humans, 3000 years ago, was more akin to the life of an animal, than to the life that we are aware of. It was violent and nasty.
Click to expand...

Then why does WHO establish that greatest health threat for the future of mankind is not aids (which we don't have a cure for - funny how th ehuman race is always in the grip of some epidemic they don't have a cure for ....)but mental disease?

As for animal life - a dog runs around on 4 legs and a man runs around on four wheels - what's the diference?


All existence was about feeding and fucking and fighting.
Click to expand...

Sounds like contemporary New York, except that people are too busy doing the last two to perform the first one properly

When you look back over ancient history, from 40,000 years ago up to today, all you see is the constant betterment of the human condition. And not subjectively. That isn't to say that there aren't costs. Everything has costs and benefits. But pointing to smog, and the World Wars of last century, and whatever other ills perturb you does not erase the far greater benefits.
Click to expand...

Did you know that to qualify for the top 2% of wealthy people in the world you are only required to possess a bank account (never mind how much money is in it or if you have overdraft facilties)?

As for the constant betterment, I think that is a bit of a contraversial statement - even einstein said he wasn't sure what weapons we would be using to fight the third world war with but he was certain that the fourth one would be fought with rocks and sticks

My point is that we are not actualy materialy advanced, merely advanced in exploitation, not just of third world countries, but also the environment - consider the advancement of plumbing - now you can have water on faucet in your own bathroom - but unfortunately if you want to drink anything you have to buy bottled water because the water is so polluted by industrial enterprise (perhaps contributed to by the plumbing industry).


There always seems to be two types of people, the ones that only look at the costs, and the ones that only look at the benefits. The reality is that a slight calculation is required, and I don't think you could ever stack the equation in a way that the costs come out ahead.
Click to expand...

Depends where you are living - certainly the residents of Chernobyll may disagree. So might women who balance sledgehammers on their heads so that they can carry their babies in their arms when they go to work
 
Last edited:
That's technology, not science.
Click to expand...

So the manipulation of electric current did not arrive by scientific theroy?

Most of all technology involves science, in some minute way, if we are manipulating electric current, through all the computers parts, it's a science.

click
 
lightgigantic said:
As for animal life - a dog runs around on 4 legs and a man runs around on four wheels - what's the diference?
Click to expand...

Wheels are round and full of air?
We go faster?
Legs are cheaper?

I give up.
 
lightgigantic said:
So now you have to establish how computers have improved our quality of life .....

Did you know that most internet downloads (over 60%) are related to the transmission of pornographic material?
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea how much money people are saving on porn thanks to the internet? And the amount of gasoline saved with not having to find a 7/11 where you are sure to not bump into someone you know in the parking lot? The convienence alone...

I think you just shot your own argument in the foot.
 
“Dumbing Down” is not only occurring but also essential for a unity to remain uniform and harmonious.
An ant is a successful team player because it lacks any independence and free-thinking to make its participation within the whole and its cooperation with other of its own kind problematic.

With humans things become more difficult.
Even the simplest human mind possesses more free-thought and sense of identity and individuality than the lowly ant.
His participation within groups, especially large ones, becomes more problematic.

The trend, therefore, of dumbing-down or towards stupidity is an essential part of this harmonization of mankind.
The less character and intelligence and knowledge a mind possesses the more easily it is integrated within a whole and the more easily it accepts its lot and the knowledge and morals the group needs to maintain cohesion.
There is less resistance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top