Author Topic: That's OK then?  (Read 3109 times)


Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3901
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2018, 03:58:16 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

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.

Quote
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.

Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2018, 04:28:20 PM »
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

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3901
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #3 on: April 11, 2018, 04:52:03 PM »
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.
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #4 on: April 11, 2018, 05:04:35 PM »
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.

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3901
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2018, 06:21:58 PM »
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.
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #6 on: April 11, 2018, 06:58:47 PM »
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.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 65796
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2018, 07:05:21 PM »
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.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2018, 07:10:05 PM »
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.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 65796
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #9 on: April 11, 2018, 07:15:50 PM »
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?

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #10 on: April 11, 2018, 07:27:12 PM »
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'.


bluehillside Retd.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19724
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #11 on: April 11, 2018, 07:46:03 PM »
Vladdo,

Quote
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.

Quote
All assumptions in that last paragraph are wrong...

They're not assumptions at all - you just made that up.

Quote
...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...   
"Don't make me come down there."

God

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #12 on: April 11, 2018, 08:03:50 PM »
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.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 65796
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #13 on: April 11, 2018, 08:12:41 PM »
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

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #14 on: April 11, 2018, 08:16:03 PM »

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 65796
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #15 on: April 11, 2018, 08:18:19 PM »

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #16 on: April 11, 2018, 08:32:21 PM »


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.

bluehillside Retd.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19724
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2018, 11:42:12 AM »
Vladdo,

Quote
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.

Quote
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”.
"Don't make me come down there."

God

Steve H

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11044
  • God? She's black.
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2018, 11:46:55 AM »
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.
"That bloke over there, out of Ultravox, is really childish."
"Him? Midge Ure?"
"Yes, very."

bluehillside Retd.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19724
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2018, 12:29:10 PM »
Steve H,

Quote
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?
"Don't make me come down there."

God

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #20 on: April 12, 2018, 04:41:58 PM »
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

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33801
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #21 on: April 12, 2018, 04:43:28 PM »
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

bluehillside Retd.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19724
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2018, 04:52:01 PM »
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.   
« Last Edit: April 12, 2018, 07:16:31 PM by bluehillside Retd. »
"Don't make me come down there."

God

bluehillside Retd.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19724
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2018, 04:53:21 PM »
"Don't make me come down there."

God

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3901
Re: That's OK then?
« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2018, 06:06:01 PM »
Vlad,

https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy

Just scroll down to I.3
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright