toldailytopic: In the last 200 years (or so) how has society advanced? In what ways h

[Nathon Detroit]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for December 2nd, 2009 10:42 AM

toldailytopic: In the last 200 years (or so) how has society advanced? In what ways has society regressed? Generally, are things getting better or worse?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

 

[GuySmiley]

I recently heard a podcast (Stuff you should know) about the country of Bhutan. They measure something they call Gross National Happiness. Now that sounds like some drivel you'd hear out of Boulder . . . but whats neat about Bhutan is they really take that seriously. Its not just a pipe dream to them. They actually measure GNH in tangible ways and make policy decissions based on that.

That has got me thinking a lot lately about life and hapiness. Sure we are technologically, and economically more advanced than a place like Bhutan, but how does that translate to our actual day to day lives? Is it really a good thing? Compare the US today with the US a few decades ago. We work longer (stress-filled) hours in dual income families in general. I don't think we are better off.

 

[elohiym]

We work longer (stress-filled) hours in dual income families in general. I don't think we are better off.

Not only that, but females wear clothes now and earn profit. :sigh:

Oh how I long for the good ol' days on Ferenginar.

 

[chrysostom]

we now have mad people

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I think the biggest differences are:

Technologically, we have advance in tremendous ways.
Morally, we have regressed in horrendous ways.

 

[DocJohnson]

I think the biggest differences are:

Technologically, we have advance in tremendous ways.
Morally, we have regressed in horrendous ways.

I agree.

The quality of life due to technology has obviously progressed.

The quality of ethics, on the other hand, has not. Part of that is due to technology. :mmph:

 

[Son of Jack]

We've learned with absolute certainty what Solomon knew thousands of years ago. Material possessions are vanities, which cannot make people happy, if they are the end in and of themselves.

 

[elohiym]

We've learned with absolute certainty what Solomon knew thousands of years ago. Material possessions are vanities, which cannot make people happy, if they are the end in and of themselves.

1Tim 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

 

[elohiym]

The quality of life due to technology has obviously progressed.

In some ways it has, but in many ways technology has caused us to regress.

 

[Stripe]

I think there are built in mechanisms that keep moral decline in check .. somewhat. But I'd say "worse" and technological advance does little to offset moral deficiencies.

 

[DocJohnson]

In some ways it has, but in many ways technology has caused us to regress.

Yep, that's what I said.

 

[Son of Jack]

In some ways it has, but in many ways technology has caused us to regress.

Think about this one thing...we are at the only point in history, generally speaking (within the last 80-100 years), of being able to completely destroy almost every living thing on the planet. Yet, we almost totally lack the moral foundation to prevent such an act from occurring.

 

[Son of Jack]

Additionally, we have also learned what Solomon knew...namely, that knowledge in and of itself cannot bring happiness. Our society believes that information equals knowledge, and the internet provides access to almost unlimited information. And, yet again, we aren't happy...in fact, we are, for the most part, miserable.

 

[elohiym]

Yep, that's what I said.

I meant ethics aside. For example, if a primitive solution is forsaken in exchange for a technological solution that is not as effective, we have regressed.

 

[DocJohnson]

...if a primitive solution is forsaken in exchange for a technological solution that is not as effective...

For example...?

 

[elohiym]

For example...?

Composting human waste.

 

[DocJohnson]

Composting human waste.

Can you expound? You're being way too cryptic, and I'm just trying to understand your reasoning.

 

[elohiym]

Can you expound? You're being way too cryptic, and I'm just trying to understand your reasoning.

You can either dispose of human waste, i.e. poop, by composting it (primitive) or by dumping it into sewers, superficially "treating it," and eventually dumping it into the ocean (modern technology). Using the primitive method needs little infrastructure, uses minimal resources, and results in a safe, usable form of plant fertilizer. Using the modern technological method needs extensive infrastructure, uses substantially more resources, and results in an unsafe byproduct often being dumped into oceans and waterways. Hence, you get a tasty lobster bathed in human excrement thanks to modern technology. :chew:

 

[Lighthouse]

Ever since we started accepting sexual immorality we've been going downhill.

 

[elohiym]

Ever since we started accepting sexual immorality we've been going downhill.

The world's been accepting sexual immorality for thousands of years. In some respect things have likely improved over the years.