The Boat Of A Million Years, XIX, Thule, 4-5.
Wanderer learns that the number of people who live in a community that accepts mortality is dwindling.
Yukiko learns from her computer that:
interstellar probes report that life is rare, that three species have paleolithic technology and that another three, also possessing only simple implements, might be intelligent or just "'...elaborately instinctive...'" (p. 473);
the Web has detected possibly seven hundred and fifty two high-energy civilizations, the nearest four hundred and seventy parsecs away, and receives probably informational signals from twenty three sources;
the information transmitted does not appear to be about mathematics or physics and can be about other sciences only on the unwarranted assumption that Terrestrial computers:
"'...have not by now delineated every possible kind of biochemistry in the universe.'" (p. 474);
in about two and a half millennia, it might be possible to establish communication with the nearest civilizations through the near-light-speed robot probes.
Yukiko should live that long but does not want to wait that long.
16 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I can it being possible to extend life spans the way we see it in FOR LOVE AND GLORY, thru periodic medical treatments; but not indefinitely by means of a once only treatment, as in WORLD WITHOUT STARS.
Iow, Yukiko's problem is one I've mentioned many times: what will people do if they don't have to work, strive, or struggle to survive? Boredom, frustration, and hence discontent (and all that may come from that) becomes real dangers.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Boredom, frustration and discontent are all too frequent with work!
Yukiko wants a kind of understanding that she calls "enlightenment." She is frustrated because she is not finding that although I think that she could be advised and guided in meditation and contemplation, whether working or not.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And that still won't be enough for many. Meditation? To what end or goal, esp. if you don't believe in God or some kind of Ultimate? I don't buy what you suggest.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I was talking about Yukiko specifically in relation to "enlightenment." As for many other people, it remains true that they suffer boredom, frustration and discontent with and because of their work.
I do believe in some kind of Ultimate, just not a personal one. Just sitting meditation has no aim or goal. It is practice of awareness of what is here and now. That is beneficial.
Please understand that other people have different spiritual philosophies and practices. It is not just "God" or nothing. And addicng "...or some kind of Ultimate..." opens the discussion out instead of closing it off.
Paul.
Delete "c."
Kaor, Paul!
I sit corrected! Then I'll simply say I don't think most people will care about meditation. The problem I pointed out remains.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But I suggest meditation for Yukiko and for anyone else who wants it, not for most people.
The problem you pointed out will not remain in a completely different society where people have been brought up differently and have a completely different range of possibilities and expectations. Children are not bored if presented with interesting activities that inform them about this world that they share with others. Education can lead them towards adult activities that in future can transcend our present distinction between work and leisure.
Of course many people as they are now would be completely bewildered and lost if suddenly dumped into a totally different society but that cannot happen. There will be transitions. (We have been through this before.)
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I don't believe in "completely different societies," because I don't believe humans are going to change from what we actually are: flawed, imperfect, prone to being violent and quarrelsome.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I have repeatedly said why I disagree with that last statement. People are violent and quarrelsome in some conditions but not in others.
Paul.
From Sean:
Kaor, Paul!
Because we are at loggerheads about human nature and human socieites. And all of us can become violent or quarrelsome at any time.
Ad astra! Sean
We cannot all become violent or quarrelsome at any time. Think about that statement. Does the Pope become violent when giving audience to a Cardinal? Do I become violent when I meet my daughter in the street? Of course not. And, if that did happen, then it would be highly unusual and aberrant. It is not something that is just waiting to happen all the time.
If it's possible to prolong lifespans indefinitely, it should eventually be possible to do it as a one-off. Simply stop the process of aging, which is a matter of replication become increasingly imperfect.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: I'll try to clarify what I mean. We are all of us potentially prone to being quarrelsome, even violent. Most popes are gentle men, I agree, but the Church has had its full share of hot tempered popes and cardinals. I insist on that "potentiality," with the possibility that any of us can "lose it."
Mr. Stirling: And I recall how Hanno founded the Rufus Institute in THE BOAT OF A MILLION YEARS, precisely to investigate that.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But I do not deny the mere POTENTIAL of anything! We are also potentially peaceful and that potentiality can be realized. I do not see the point of repeating this.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
We "repeat" because I am far more skeptical and distrustful of human beings, including myself, than you are.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But repetition is unnecessary when we have both said what we have to say. I have said that people are violent in some conditions but not in other conditions so I have already acknowledged a POTENTIAL both for violence and for non-violence. I have not denied the former. However, endlessly to repeat "violence and quarrelsomeness" and only "violence and quarrelsomeness" is certainly to denigrate humanity. Since there are many conditions and occasions when people interact peacefully without falling on each other tooth and nail, let's encourage those conditions. If some Popes are gentle, then let's make sure that all Popes from now on are gentle. That is just one example that we have cited, of course, but the point applies more generally. There is massive opposition to the continued use of violence in international affairs. That opposition can go somewhere politically. At least, it should be encouraged, not argued against.
Paul.
Post a Comment