Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on April 11, 2018, 01:18:52 PM
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2018/apr/11/good-news-at-last-the-world-isnt-as-horrific-as-you-think
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/11/deaths-of-uk-homeless-people-more-than-double-in-five-years
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2018/apr/11/good-news-at-last-the-world-isnt-as-horrific-as-you-think
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/11/deaths-of-uk-homeless-people-more-than-double-in-five-years
No, it isn't OK, assuming that your comment was directed towards the ideas expressed in your first linked article.
I doubt somehow that your remark was directed towards the increase in deaths of homeless people.
I think that just one paragraph from the Hans Rosling article suggests he had you pretty well summed up.
My guess is you feel that me saying that the world is getting better is like me telling you that everything is fine, and that feels ridiculous. I agree. Everything is not fine. We should still be very concerned. As long as there are plane crashes, preventable child deaths, endangered species, climate change sceptics, male chauvinists, crazy dictators, toxic waste, journalists in prison, and girls not getting an education, we cannot relax. But it is just as ridiculous to look away from the progress that has been made. The consequent loss of hope can be devastating. When people wrongly believe that nothing is improving, they may lose confidence in measures that actually work.
-
No, it isn't OK, assuming that your comment was directed towards the ideas expressed in your first linked article.
I doubt somehow that your remark was directed towards the increase in deaths of homeless people.
I think that just one paragraph from the Hans Rosling article suggests he had you pretty well summed up.
The real problem is that Rosling fails to see that the prime pockets of 'progress' are in fact on the turn.
Concern for others wealth and welfare,
international stability,
International Protocol are all going the other way.
This added to the precariousness of the climate and the extinction level which are now I would move beyond our control negates Roslings complacencey.
You will note that subtly the writings of Rosling and say Pinker are not so much viewed in terms of how things really are but how things should be if only we had kept faith with optimism
-
On the subject of your first sentence, these are addressed to some extent in the Rosling Article of course, so I don't think it is fair to say that he didn't see them or give them his attention.
No, I don't agree. Both Rosling and Pinker look(ed) to the past, the present and the future.
Whether one wants to be an optimist or a pessimist, one will always be able to collate statistics to reinforce one's point of view. However, I think a case can be made to look at the progress that has been, and continues to be made in the world as well as pay justified attention to the world's ills. Simply to dismiss such an attempt as 'That's OK then' is from my point of view dismissive and facile, and, as I have already indicated, Rosling was well aware of that reaction.
-
On the subject of your first sentence, these are addressed to some extent in the Rosling Article of course, so I don't think it is fair to say that he didn't see them or give them his attention.
No, I don't agree. Both Rosling and Pinker look(ed) to the past, the present and the future.
Whether one wants to be an optimist or a pessimist, one will always be able to collate statistics to reinforce one's point of view. However, I think a case can be made to look at the progress that has been, and continues to be made in the world as well as pay justified attention to the world's ills. Simply to dismiss such an attempt as 'That's OK then' is from my point of view dismissive and facile, and, as I have already indicated, Rosling was well aware of that reaction.
One cannot deny there has been progress but we are now on the turn. The implication of course with Pinker is that enlightenment equals increased morality. That argument is sustainable until the turn of the tide. Indeed for a generation recipient of given wealth and welfare to deprive the next generation of it is more immoral than generations unenlightened who exploit and make life hard for others because they knew no better.
And of course the caning of the natural world in the face of evidence trumps any so called progress because of the long term effects.
-
Well I was born during the 2nd World War.If we are now 'on the turn' as you say, there's an awful long way, in my opinion, to go before we(in the UK) are anywhere near what life was like in that period, and for some years after. However, Rosling is looking, not at a particular country, or group of countries, but the entire world, and not over a short time period but a long time period. Whatever you see, at the moment, as the turn of the tide, might well appear in an entirely different light in 20 years time, say.
As far as Pinker goes, I reserve the right to make any judgements on his position only after I have finished reading 'Enlightenment Now', and, at the moment I am just starting Chapter 10(the Environment) of 23. There is a lot to take in and check, as it is replete with data.
As far as the 'caning of the natural world' is concerned, I suggest there are increasing signs of progress. Don't forget, the natural world has been caned by human beings since the year dot. My view is obviously not as pessimistic as yours. I accept that climate change is a big problem, and that, for instance, plastic refuse in the seas and oceans is of major concern, but I also remember the high incidence of oil spills, which have now been dramatically reduced, the depletion of the Amazon rainforest(which has also been dramatically reduced), the almost complete eradication of the dangers from acid rain and the continuing replenishment of the ozone layer after the threat from chlorofluorocarbons. It's not all bad news as far as nature is concerned.
Sometimes it is well worth looking as much at what humans have achieved as well as acknowledging their failures.
-
Well I was born during the 2nd World War.If we are now 'on the turn' as you say, there's an awful long way, in my opinion, to go before we(in the UK) are anywhere near what life was like in that period, and for some years after. However, Rosling is looking, not at a particular country, or group of countries, but the entire world, and not over a short time period but a long time period. Whatever you see, at the moment, as the turn of the tide, might well appear in an entirely different light in 20 years time, say.
As far as Pinker goes, I reserve the right to make any judgements on his position only after I have finished reading 'Enlightenment Now', and, at the moment I am just starting Chapter 10(the Environment) of 23. There is a lot to take in and check, as it is replete with data.
As far as the 'caning of the natural world' is concerned, I suggest there are increasing signs of progress. Don't forget, the natural world has been caned by human beings since the year dot. My view is obviously not as pessimistic as yours. I accept that climate change is a big problem, and that, for instance, plastic refuse in the seas and oceans is of major concern, but I also remember the high incidence of oil spills, which have now been dramatically reduced, the depletion of the Amazon rainforest(which has also been dramatically reduced), the almost complete eradication of the dangers from acid rain and the continuing replenishment of the ozone layer after the threat from chlorofluorocarbons. It's not all bad news as far as nature is concerned.
Sometimes it is well worth looking as much at what humans have achieved as well as acknowledging their failures.
Rosling obviously wants us to look at the world as a citizen of the world as heartwarming as that may be, the centres of this view are turning the other way leaving this as a manifesto.
-
Rosling obviously wants us to look at the world as a citizen of the world as heartwarming as that may be, the centres of this view are turning the other way leaving this as a manifesto.
That would be 'wanted' since he's dead. Wouldn't being a 'citizen of the world's tie in with some mainstream Christian thought? Odd that you have chosen to align yourself with Theresa May who didn't like the idea.
-
That would be 'wanted' since he's dead. Wouldn't being a 'citizen of the world's the in with some mainstream Christian thought? Odd that you have chosen to align yourself with Theresa May who didn't like the idea.
Just because it is turning the other way doesn't mean that I like it....but obviously there is something wrong with the Pinkerian notion of inexorable progress and optimism.
-
Just because it is turning the other way doesn't mean that I like it....but obviously there is something wrong with the Pinkerian notion of inexorable progress and optimism.
Apart from you assuming your conclusion, this seems to ignore that what you are challenging is an aim you seem to believe in?
-
Apart from you assuming your conclusion, this seems to ignore that what you are challenging is an aim you seem to believe in?
No Pinkerism is a view that enlightenment inexorably and inevitably and formulaicly brings about progress. All assumptions in that last paragraph are wrong since there is no shortage of enlightenment ideas and yet those places at maximum Pinkerian enlightenment are 'on the turn'.
-
Vladdo,
No Pinkerism is a view that enlightenment inexorably and inevitably and formulaicly brings about progress.
No it isn't. Not even close. "Pinkerism" (if there is such a thing) is actually looking at data and comparing where we were with where we are now across all sorts of important indicators.
All assumptions in that last paragraph are wrong...
They're not assumptions at all - you just made that up.
...since there is no shortage of enlightenment ideas and yet those places at maximum Pinkerian enlightenment are 'on the turn'.
What on earth makes you think that "places" are "on the turn" as you put it? Are literacy rates declining? Life expectancies shortening? Previously endemic diseases returning? Fewer girls going to school? What?
Or could it just be that you've fallen into the availability bias of referencing the stories the press report about certain negative trends and extrapolating from that false conclusions about societies as a whole?
Hmmm...
-
Vladdo,
No it isn't. Not even close. "Pinkerism" (if there is such a thing) is actually looking at data and comparing where we were with where we are now across all sorts of important indicators.
Er, that's called Looking at data (although how you get data from medieval Africa or wherever seems a bit of a mystery) and making comparison.
Pinkerism also involves something called the enlightenment which is apparently totally wonderful, a bit of antireligion and a dollop of pro capitalism.
-
No Pinkerism is a view that enlightenment inexorably and inevitably and formulaicly brings about progress. All assumptions in that last paragraph are wrong since there is no shortage of enlightenment ideas and yet those places at maximum Pinkerian enlightenment are 'on the turn'.
Gibberish
-
Gibberish
Prove it.
-
Prove it.
More gibberish
-
What on earth makes you think that "places" are "on the turn" as you put it? Are literacy rates declining? Life expectancies shortening? Previously endemic diseases returning? Fewer girls going to school? What?
Or could it just be that you've fallen into the availability bias of referencing the stories the press report about certain negative trends and extrapolating from that false conclusions about societies as a whole?
Hmmm...
Life expectancy rises are at least slowing down. This has to be due to health provision and attitudes to providing that are definitely changing from the standard enlightened view. There is no evidence that society will suddenly say, you know what we will vote for whoever will put more money into health. This goes for foreign aid too. Will endemic disease return, probably given antibiotic resistance, Fewer girls in school no. pprogressively poorer resourced schools.......You betcha.
Let's not forget certain negative trends, Global warming, species extinction.
-
Vladdo,
Life expectancy rises are at least slowing down. This has to be due to health provision and attitudes to providing that are definitely changing from the standard enlightened view. There is no evidence that society will suddenly say, you know what we will vote for whoever will put more money into health. This goes for foreign aid too. Will endemic disease return, probably given antibiotic resistance, Fewer girls in school no. pprogressively poorer resourced schools.......You betcha.
Do you have any evidence for these assertions, or are they more things you’ve just made up? You can find localised examples – correlations between life expectancy averages and cuts to the NHS for example – but as a globalised phenomenon there’s no evidence at all that “life expectancy rises are slowing down” that I can find.
Let's not forget certain negative trends, Global warming, species extinction.
Yes, let’s not. And let’s spend time and effort fixing them too. The point though is that you can always find examples like this but they don't provide the overall picture – let alone tell us that “things are on the turn”.
-
Life expectancy rises are bound to slow down - if they continued rising at the same rate, before long people would be living 200 years, which is obviously impossible. It's like the record for running the mile - it keeps being broken, but by increasingly small amounts as the absolute limit of what's possible gets nearer.
-
Steve H,
Life expectancy rises are bound to slow down - if they continued rising at the same rate, before long people would be living 200 years, which is obviously impossible. It's like the record for running the mile - it keeps being broken, but by increasingly small amounts as the absolute limit of what's possible gets nearer.
First, his assertion was that life expectancy increases already have begun to slow down. As a generalised phenomenon, there’s no evidence for this claim that I can find.
Second, why do you think that living to 200 is “obviously impossible”? This chap for example (who works in the field) thinks that someone who’ll live to 200 has already been born:
https://www.quora.com/Has-the-first-person-to-live-to-200-years-old-been-born-yet
So far as I know there’s no absolute barrier to possible human age, and who can say what technologies will come along in future that’ll extend it beyond anything we can imagine just now?
-
Steve H,
First, his assertion was that life expectancy increases already have begun to slow down. As a generalised phenomenon, there’s no evidence for this claim that I can find.
Second, why do you think that living to 200 is “obviously impossible”? This chap for example (who works in the field) thinks that someone who’ll live to 200 has already been born:
https://www.quora.com/Has-the-first-person-to-live-to-200-years-old-been-born-yet
So far as I know there’s no absolute barrier to possible human age, and who can say what technologies will come along in future that’ll extend it beyond anything we can imagine just now?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pensioners-uk-life-expectancy-falling-institute-and-faculty-of-actuaries-a7661571.html
-
Life expectancy rises are bound to slow down - if they continued rising at the same rate, before long people would be living 200 years, which is obviously impossible. It's like the record for running the mile - it keeps being broken, but by increasingly small amounts as the absolute limit of what's possible gets nearer.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pensioners-uk-life-expectancy-falling-institute-and-faculty-of-actuaries-a7661571.html
-
Vladdo,
You (Reply 20):
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pensioners-uk-life-expectancy-falling-institute-and-faculty-of-actuaries-a7661571.html
Me (Reply 17):
"Do you have any evidence for these assertions, or are they more things you’ve just made up? You can find localised examples – correlations between life expectancy averages and cuts to the NHS for example – but as a globalised phenomenon there’s no evidence at all that “life expectancy rises are slowing down” that I can find."
So that's a "no" then I take it - you don't have evidence that life expectancy increases are slowing down as a globalised phenomenon. The point by the way is that - while NHS cuts or bad weather (or both) has apparently recently had a deleterious effect in the UK - a whole list of other countries are pulling ahead of us.
-
Vladdo,
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pensioners-uk-life-expectancy-falling-institute-and-faculty-of-actuaries-a7661571.html
That's two own goals in quick succession. Are you going for the hat trick?
-
Vlad,
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy
Just scroll down to I.3
-
enki,
Vlad,
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy
Just scroll down to I.3
Oh well, if you're gonna use facts and stuff you can prove anything with those. Pah!
Vlad reminds me here of Sparky who used to post here - he blithely asserted that earthquakes were on the increase, and this supposed phenomenon was evidence of his god's displeasure or of a second coming or something. When it was explained to him that his claim was utter bollocks he threw lots of obfuscation at the problem, then disappeared.
What are the odds that Vlad will do something similar I wonder?
-
Steve H,
First, his assertion was that life expectancy increases already have begun to slow down. As a generalised phenomenon, there’s no evidence for this claim that I can find.
Second, why do you think that living to 200 is “obviously impossible”? This chap for example (who works in the field) thinks that someone who’ll live to 200 has already been born:
https://www.quora.com/Has-the-first-person-to-live-to-200-years-old-been-born-yet
So far as I know there’s no absolute barrier to possible human age, and who can say what technologies will come along in future that’ll extend it beyond anything we can imagine just now?
Well, maybe, but that'll be due to medical advances which haven't happened yet. In the meantime, the margin is bound to narrow.
-
So that's a "no" then I take it - you don't have evidence that life expectancy increases are slowing down as a globalised phenomenon. The point by the way is that - while NHS cuts or bad weather (or both) has apparently recently had a deleterious effect in the UK - a whole list of other countries are pulling ahead of us.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/life-expectancy-in-the-u-s-is-falling-and-drug-overdose-deaths-are-soaring/
-
enki,
Oh well, if you're gonna use facts and stuff you can prove anything with those. Pah!
Vlad reminds me here of Sparky who used to post here - he blithely asserted that earthquakes were on the increase, and this supposed phenomenon was evidence of his god's displeasure or of a second coming or something. When it was explained to him that his claim was utter bollocks he threw lots of obfuscation at the problem, then disappeared.
What are the odds that Vlad will do something similar I wonder?
I am not saying indicators aren't 'globally' on the up hence with regard to your suggested localised 'blips' the thread is titled ''That's OK then''?. I am saying that in the parts of the world traditionally beneficiaries of what Pinker describes as enlightenment are on the turn and I am suggesting that that is the end game of enlightenment and arguments from Pinker that it is some kind of infallible realised Pollyannaism.
Life expectency in the US and UK IS falling. That is a lot of significant ''local'', Hillside.
Globally there is more wealth Hillside........which is ''localised'' in the hands of the few but following your logic ''That's OK then.''
-
Vladdo,
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/life-expectancy-in-the-u-s-is-falling-and-drug-overdose-deaths-are-soaring/
And he's actually done it - he's scored the hat trick of wrongness!
Genius incompetence, just genius...
So now we know that Vladdo is capable of finding localised examples of life expectancy increases slowing down, but also - thanks to enki's research - that the global phenomenon isn't "on the turn" at all we can conclude safely I think that Vladdo's bizarre assertions about the failure of post enlightenment thinking is the crock it always appeared to be.
Coda: incidentally, if you want to find examples of lousy life outcomes across a range of measures then the obvious place to look is the theocracies, closely followed by countries that aren't theocratic by government but are heavily in thrall to various religious beliefs. Funny that.
-
Vladdo,
I am not saying indicators aren't 'globally' on the up hence with regard to your suggested localised 'blips' the thread is titled ''That's OK then''?. I am saying that in the parts of the world traditionally beneficiaries of what Pinker describes as enlightenment are on the turn and I am suggesting that that is the end game of enlightenment and arguments from Pinker that it is some kind of infallible realised Pollyannaism.
Then your suggestion is wrong. Some parts of the world certainly are suffering slow downs or even reversals (due to localised issues like drug use and NHS cuts that are bugger all to do with post enlightenment values) but the great majority are pushing ahead as enki's data showed.
Life expectency in the US and UK IS falling. That is a lot of significant ''local'', Hillside.
No it isn't. First, it's not true - life expectancy in the UK isn't "falling" at all, but the rate of increase has declined - probably because of savage NHS and social care cuts, both of which (in an irony that will be lost on you) are themselves fundamentally reflections of post enlightenment thinking.
Second, it's wouldn't be "a lot" in any case when expressed in the context of overall, global increases in life expectancy (and in disease reduction, and in increased literacy, and in reductions in teen pregnancies, and in...etc).
Globally there is more wealth Hillside........which is ''localised'' in the hands of the few but following your logic ''That's OK then.''
Nope. No idea.
-
Vladdo,
And he's actually done it - he's scored the hat trick of wrongness!
Genius incompetence, just genius...
So now we know that Vladdo is capable of finding localised examples of life expectancy increases slowing down, but also - thanks to enki's research - that the global phenomenon isn't "on the turn" at all we can conclude safely I think that Vladdo's bizarre assertions about the failure of post enlightenment thinking is the crock it always appeared to be.
Coda: incidentally, if you want to find examples of lousy life outcomes across a range of measures then the obvious place to look is the theocracies, closely followed by countries that aren't theocratic by government but are heavily in thrall to various religious beliefs. Funny that.
Shrill and hysterical.
We know how 'growth' figures can be presented Hillside.
We know scientism leads to ''As a species'' ism as demonstrated in duff, meaningless yet heartwarming statements like we are on the threshold of knowing the basic structure of the universe. When of course only a few do. It's the old Roddenberry thing that we are all shipmates on a star trek AKA Pollyanna ism. And that's before we see that other growth factors are being ignored. Growth in global temperatures, growth in antibiotic resistance etc. growth in concentration of wealth....but hey , it's OK because ''AS a species......''.
I'm afraid while Antitheists argue that we can go home and ''stop worrying''. I see all sorts of people who realise that 'enlightenment' is not an infallible process. They do worry that in the UK and US life expectancy is falling.....because these traditionally are places where the opposite has been true.
-
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-decline-of-violence/
-
Vladdo,
Me (Reply 25)
Oh well, if you're gonna use facts and stuff you can prove anything with those. Pah!
Vlad reminds me here of Sparky who used to post here - he blithely asserted that earthquakes were on the increase, and this supposed phenomenon was evidence of his god's displeasure or of a second coming or something. When it was explained to him that his claim was utter bollocks he threw lots of obfuscation at the problem, then disappeared.
What are the odds that Vlad will do something similar I wonder?
Vladdo (Reply 31)
Shrill and hysterical.
We know how 'growth' figures can be presented Hillside.
We know scientism leads to ''As a species'' ism as demonstrated in duff, meaningless yet heartwarming statements like we are on the threshold of knowing the basic structure of the universe. When of course only a few do. It's the old Roddenberry thing that we are all shipmates on a star trek AKA Pollyanna ism. And that's before we see that other growth factors are being ignored. Growth in global temperatures, growth in antibiotic resistance etc. growth in concentration of wealth....but hey , it's OK because ''AS a species......''.
I'm afraid while Antitheists argue that we can go home and ''stop worrying''. I see all sorts of people who realise that 'enlightenment' is not an infallible process. They do worry that in the UK and US life expectancy is falling.....because these traditionally are places where the opposite has been true.
Truly I have the power of prophecy!
-
I am not saying indicators aren't 'globally' on the up hence with regard to your suggested localised 'blips' the thread is titled ''That's OK then''?. I am saying that in the parts of the world traditionally beneficiaries of what Pinker describes as enlightenment are on the turn and I am suggesting that that is the end game of enlightenment and arguments from Pinker that it is some kind of infallible realised Pollyannaism.
Life expectency in the US and UK IS falling. That is a lot of significant ''local'', Hillside.
Globally there is more wealth Hillside........which is ''localised'' in the hands of the few but following your logic ''That's OK then.''
Ever heard of a plateau, Vlad, or is that too deep for you? We are bound to arrive at them from time to time, in the quest for knowledge; 'we', as in we humans.
Regards ippy
-
One cannot deny there has been progress but we are now on the turn.
Progress is not a one dimensional thing. Rosling knew that but you are flagrantly misrepresenting his position.
I guess you just like being miserable.