NationStates Jolt Archive

What would happen if, 10 years from now, modern society collapses and we go into a second Dark Age? What tech, ideas, etc. would be lost? What would happen?

That would depend a lot on how exactly we entered this new Dark Age.

I'd lol at the parts of the world that didn't notice the difference, then get killed for being a heretic. Unless Discordianism somehow becomes the dominant religion.

I'd lol at the parts of the world that didn't notice the difference, then get killed for being a heretic. Unless Discordianism somehow becomes the dominant religion.

Wouldn't happen. If it came into power it would be explicit that all adherents would then have to freak out themselves.

pah. thats not gonna happen.

I think it would be virtually the same, but more muddy.

Wouldn't happen. If it came into power it would be explicit that all adherents would then have to freak out themselves.

Figured as much.

Well, for starters, I'd have to start liking warm beer.

I believe that a physical manifestation of man's dark side will lure and entice the needy and weak-minded and set up shop in Las Vegas while a 108 year old African-American lady from Nebraska will lead the pure hearted to Boulder and they will engage in a battle of Good and Evil...

It's so nice to consider.

I'll ride my bicycle along freeways, knit a jumper atop Trump towers and grow some courgettes and rocket in a patch behind my shack.

Mmmmm. It's going to be great.

What would happen if, 10 years from now, modern society collapses and we go into a second Dark Age? What tech, ideas, etc. would be lost? What would happen?

A "second" Dark Age? When was the first one?

You surely don't mean the medieval times do you? They were called "dark ages" by the subsequent renaissancists that felt the need to break with the past - call them cultural revolutionists. That doesn't mean it was an actual dark age. In fact, the medieval era saw a lot of innovations/inventions that were later on deemed "characteristical" for the early modern and even industrial eras: like innovations in tenure, livestock management, banking economy, cities, semi-democratic government (the Charter of Kortenbergh dated 1312 in Brabant, current-day Belgium, was the first written constitution that forced the nation leader at that time, the Duke of Brabant, to rule in accordance with the people's wishes, who were then mostly represented by the cities, but still... a milestone). And the reasons that the subsequent generation wanted to do away with the "former era" were as usual, simple: self-definition, urge for power, cultural justification.

My point: there has never been and never will be such a thing as "a dark age". From a historical point of view, no era is better or worse than any other. Subjectively speaking, that may be a different thing, but as is included in the meaning of the word "subjective", this means that no era is the same for all the people living it or reflecting upon it. There is only what people want, what people have, and how far people are willing to go to obtain what they don't have. The entities and/or definitions that are objects of these wants and needs are by themselves irrelevant, it is only what they represent that matters.

And to answer question: I think macdonald's would finally be deemed unnecessary.

A "second" Dark Age? When was the first one?

You surely don't mean the medieval times do you? They were called "dark ages" by the subsequent renaissancists that felt the need to break with the past - call them cultural revolutionists. That doesn't mean it was an actual dark age. In fact, the medieval era saw a lot of innovations/inventions that were later on deemed "characteristical" for the early modern and even industrial eras: like innovations in tenure, livestock management, banking economy, cities, semi-democratic government (the Charter of Kortenbergh dated 1312 in Brabant, current-day Belgium, was the first written constitution that forced the nation leader at that time, the Duke of Brabant, to rule in accordance with the people's wishes, who were then mostly represented by the cities, but still... a milestone). And the reasons that the subsequent generation wanted to do away with the "former era" were as usual, simple: self-definition, urge for power, cultural justification.

My point: there has never been and never will be such a thing as "a dark age". From a historical point of view, no era is better or worse than any other. Subjectively speaking, that may be a different thing, but as is included in the meaning of the word "subjective", this means that no era is the same for all the people living it or reflecting upon it. There is only what people want, what people have, and how far people are willing to go to obtain what they don't have. The entities and/or definitions that are objects of these wants and needs are by themselves irrelevant, it is only what they represent that matters.

And to answer question: I think macdonald's would finally be deemed unnecessary.

Lots of tech was lost after the Classical Era... like aqueducts and pipes...

Lots of tech was lost after the Classical Era... like aqueducts and pipes...

Not exactly lost, but put out of use since there were no longer people using it or willing to maintain them. The migrating peoples were from a culture that lived without such tech, was not accustom to this tech, and therefore never needed it. But, for example: they did, however, use law, and as such succesfully copied roman law and adapted it to serve their own needs. Just to say: what is needed will be used, the absence of a particular need and subsequent non-usage of means to serve that need do not signify absence of intelligence, cultural prowess or civilization. I will however give you this: if the migrating peoples had known the particular use of the aqueducts and pipes AND had a long term plan that didn't conflict with their short term plan of surviving in their new home, things might have been different in regards to medieval proto-city sanitation.

And, again, as such I predict: most likely the things that will be lost are the things that are less needed by the masses, which depends entirely on the direness of the times they live in.

Well, for starters, I'd have to start liking warm beer.
That would be a significant benefit of the collapse of civilisation: people would stop serving ice cold beer.

Look, if it tastes better ice cold, it doesn't deserve to be called beer.

I believe that a physical manifestation of man's dark side will lure and entice the needy and weak-minded and set up shop in Las Vegas while a 108 year old African-American lady from Nebraska will lead the pure hearted to Boulder and they will engage in a battle of Good and Evil...

Great movie, better book.

A "second" Dark Age? When was the first one?
I usually don't think of the medieval period when referring to a dark age. I tend more to look at that period in pre-classical Greece after the one where all the geometric pottery came from. I think that can pretty safely be labelled a dark age.

That would be a significant benefit of the collapse of civilisation: people would stop serving ice cold beer.

Look, if it tastes better ice cold, it doesn't deserve to be called beer.

ALL beer tastes better ice cold. Except your generic American brands like Budweiser, Coors, Miller, etc. Nothing could keep those from tasting like shit.

I believe that a physical manifestation of man's dark side will lure and entice the needy and weak-minded and set up shop in Las Vegas while a 108 year old African-American lady from Nebraska will lead the pure hearted to Boulder and they will engage in a battle of Good and Evil...

Let me think... That's the plot of Steven King's 'Stand', (I beleive it was called stand) right?