NationStates Jolt Archive

I wonder if people think we are getting TOO advanced a race for our own good. After all, technology brought us the a-bomb. Yet, on top of being used to kill, it also developed medicine, and medical treatment. We gained better transportation with the car, and yet no-one could deny how unhealty the smog is. Please bring me your opininions, and debate if you please.

It hasn't developed far enough. Perhaps someday our technology will enable us to harness energy more efficiently and to tap previously unavailable sources of energy which will increase the standard of living and limit the disputes over resources enough to allow everyone on earth to have a secure and comfortable life.

It hasn't developed far enough. Perhaps someday our technology will enable us to harness energy more efficiently and to tap previously unavailable sources of energy which will increase the standard of living and limit the disputes over resources enough to allow everyone on earth to have a secure and comfortable life.


or we could end up like the Borg on Star Trek. Either way I don't care as long as we have vidoe games...and Nationstates.

Technology will never go too far. We can hurt ourselves by using it too rashly, but no tech is intrinsicly bad.

The internal combustion engine was a positive devlopment, scientificly. The adoption of the personal automobile as a mainstay of American culture, and resulting suburban sprawl has been a massivly negitive development. But thats from us applying technology without sufficent regard to other consequences.

I wonder if people think we are getting TOO advanced a race for our own good.

A pope made a very similar argument in the 11th c about the use of the crossbow :)

A lot of people always feel technology is racing ahead of ethics, or our natural capacity, or whatever; so far, we've adapted to everything we've made, for good or ill.

If, as seems possible, we're affecting our whole planet to the extent is can no longer support us, though, then we might be screwed... unless we start cleaning up our messes :) Or moving to a new planet...:rolleyes:

It hasn't developed far enough. Perhaps someday our technology will enable us to harness energy more efficiently and to tap previously unavailable sources of energy which will increase the standard of living and limit the disputes over resources enough to allow everyone on earth to have a secure and comfortable life

The problems are ussually more of an economic than technological nature. We have the tech to do so many things to minimize out enviromental impact, to improve the quality of life for everyone, yet.... its not profitable.

Solar energy is clean. So clean. Yet, its not cheap enough that we will shut down our gas, oil, and hydroelectic power plants, even though switching to solar would be benefical for us as a nation, and species.

Turbines set into the walls of subway tunnels can generate electrcity, at no enviromental impact, and no increase in energy to run the subway. But no one does it, because the cost is too high, for the return in energy.

Elgesh']If, as seems possible, we're affecting our whole planet to the extent is can no longer support us, though, then we might be screwed... unless we start cleaning up our messes :) Or moving to a new planet...:rolleyes:

And we allready have the tech to do most of that cleanup. We lack the motivation, beliving that the problem isn't that serrious. And we lack the economic incentive. It will be a problem for another generation.

technology is always good though at our current pace we could be heading for a messy future as are society tries to integrate new technologies e.g. if any item can be produced for free corporations will collapse

and I don't think there is any way environmental measures could help in the long term or even the medium term beyond improving health and making a few species last a bit longer because it all leads to whether humans come first (which we always do) e.g. bulldozing a forest for housing

also environmental change on the scale of an ice age is inevitable and the deadline is about 200 years so we could try to keep it at 200 years or use unrestricted economic growth to support technology to save are fragile civilization from mass starvation

(I’m the vote who voter who clicked the wrong option)

Technology isn't bad. It has helped fight disease. It keeps us warm in the winter, cool in the summer, etc.

But a lot of technology has been put to the wrong purpose and even good technology isn't used well. We spend way too much time on the internet (that includes myself).

I think IPods are one of the more destructive inventions. They are really cool when used in moderation. To listen to some music while studying etc. But everyone at work listens to them. We don't have real conversations anymore. There is no longer that stranger that you might happen to start a conversation with while you are waiting somewhere because you are both listening to your ipod.

Cell phones and instant messaging are overused. Instead of meeting the person and having conversations in person we substitute these. But much more can be communicated in person. Human contact is healthy.

We spend billions of dollars making weapons but comparitively little fighting hunger and poverty. Technology should be put to these uses instead.

The question cracks me up. IMHO, we're probably in the stone-age relatively speaking on the universal tech heirarchy. We have a long way to go until we need to address the issue of "gone too far".
I want myt Jetsons future, NOW!

Technology isn't bad. It's the people who use it.

Think about it. An A-bomb can't do anything unless the person presses the button. A computer can't do anything unless someone plugs in the keyboard and mouse.

In fact, if you think of it that way, everything is too advanced for our own good. A good quote from a friend of mine is, "A rock isn't evil. Not even when someone rolls it down the hill and sends you to the grave."

Seriously, if we could solve the problem, it would involve killing the human race.

I wonder if people think we are getting TOO advanced a race for our own good. After all, technology brought us the a-bomb. Yet, on top of being used to kill, it also developed medicine, and medical treatment. We gained better transportation with the car, and yet no-one could deny how unhealty the smog is. Please bring me your opininions, and debate if you please.

I don't think we are getting too advanced. I just think with such new and impressive technology it requires more diligence and responsibility.

Technology is a double bladed sword.

*shrugs* Technology is just another another adaption. Sometimes it is for good, sometimes not. It doesn't matter. Technology will continue to advance because humans are curious. Luddites will gradually fall behind, becoming either quanit tourist attractions (like the Amish) who live in the past out of choice or pitiable savages destined to slowly die out from attrition as their children seek a better life. Either way, the world will continue to move, without morality or emotion. Thats life.

I don't have mechanical spider legs yet. So no.

OH, hehehehheh, this is rich! Look, the way I see it, we're not advancing fast enough. HDTV should be THE broadcast standard soon. Surround sound in every home! Yet people seem to have cases of the 'stereos' and 'widescreen-phobia'. Where's my fiber optics!?! And let me quote some Vice City Kchat dude: "Computers are not evil, it's the guys who program them!"