Rate Mankind.
On a scale of 0 - 10, 0 being "totally disappointed and not at all optimistic" and 10 being "completely satisfied; everythings going perfectly", how would you rate your fellow man and woman?
I'm gonna have to go with a 5... we're far from "totally fucked", but we are still seriously underachieving in what we could be accomplishing as a species.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
I'm going to go with a 7. Some days I think humankind is doomed and we're all scum, but that isn't most days. I generally have faith in people's ability to do and to be good. I realize I may be a little naive about it.
6 or 7.
I'd say a solid 8 just based off of his Hell in a Cell match against the Undertaker alone, but his interview skills are right at the top of the game and the way he plays with kayfabe after his active retirement is really funny.
Wait.....
Hell, if I didn't do things just because they made me feel a bit ridiculous, I wouldn't have much of a social life. - Santo Rugger.
Linus from Peanuts once observed, "I love mankind; it's people I can't stand." I feel kind of the opposite; individual people are generally all right. Mankind, on the other hand, should not be trusted.
Most people I know personally, I would rate between 5 and 8. Mankind I would tentatively rate a 2 or 3. We have started to internalize the idea that killing each other in large numbers is something to be embarrassed about; but there is still something awry when one fraction of the species is planning missions to Mars and the like, while others are still lacking basics like clean water. (This is not intended to disparage those individuals who may be planning missions to Mars; my point is simply that large-scale trends in resource allocation tend to overwhelm individual intent in such matters.)
On the other hand, "mankind" as a serious social concept has only been in play for a couple hundred years, tops. Time will tell whether humanity can figure out how to function as a cooperative entity.
As of right now, probably a six or seven. We're not totally fucked, but we're not as fabulous as we could be. I think how we utilize technology in the next few decades (for the good of all or for profit, for war or for peace?) is going to greatly influence matters in the long run.
I'd say 8. We can solve any problem we are faced with, as long as it is economically beneficial to do so. For example, we can synthesise oil on a large scale - this will be implemented when the cost of doing so drops below the cost of sucking in out of holes in the ground. War between trading partners is unprofitable.
But our economic drive works against us a little. It is economically sound for most rich countries to own a nuke or two - it's more effective a deterrent than a standing army - but this means that each nation acting in it's own interests brings us one mistake away from global annihilation.
Something tells me we haven't seen the last of foreshadowing.
Mankind is in its adolescence. Even the best of us was narcissistic and selfish at that age. Once we get away from worrying about such self-destructive ideas as "blindly preserving the rights of the individual even if it means society as a whole suffers" and "income according to merit" and start acting like a motivated civilization, truly dedicated to hurling itself through the stars, possibly into other universes, we will be a force to be reckoned with. But for now we're so hung up on contemplating our navels, making sure our hair is at least as nice as the next person's, and suffering from a transcontinental case of omnipotent deity envy that our progress toward acheiving our potential is temporarily derailed.
Mankind for it's age: 8/10
Mankind for it's potential: 2/10 (we're gonna be magnificent if we can get through our suicidal angst years).
"It's Quite Cool." -Gandalf
Posting rules
Reply with quote
