On the contrary, it is doubtful that any of it is true, and to the extent that some of it may be true, those truths are largely irrelevant to the bigger picture, which is that civilization is showing every sign of being self-terminating because of the climate change, resource depletion and overpopulation that it perforce engenders.
Take Pinker’s first thesis:
Wow, that’s mightily presumptuous, and unsupported by evidence. In fact, the evidence goes the other way. See Jared Diamond, for example, on why the development of agriculture and civilization was the worst mistake in the history of the human race.
I’ve heard of these arguments and would agree with them, if it made any difference. I’ve also read the two books of Pinker and found that it is all very statistical, but I saw no reason to doubt his statistics.
From what you (and Diamond) are saying, Mankind has been going downhill for about ten thousand years, which seems a little strange, looking at the developments in between. I would rather say that the cultural development of mankind has had problems to solve and that it is easy to criticise what you yourself weren’t confronted with. I do not doubt for a minute that some decisions were made in early history that were long-termed suicide and caused untold suffering but looking at human beings and having been a leader in professional life, I think that guiding them to the best outcome has always been difficult.
There have been moral teachings and mythologies in the past that have tried to guide mankind to a place where there is less suffering, and statistically, they improved. The Enlightenment, building on a Christian foundation, improved the decline in violence as well, but was ultimately responsible for the two world wars and the rise of deadly ideologies as well. Unfortunately, good things often throw a shadow, whether we like it or not.
The “West” has just initiated a pact against China.
UK, US, and OZ have got together to design a “defensive” system of nuclear submarines.
Is is a sign of decline that a perceived economic threat is met with a military solution?
Is it also a sign of decline that the substance of the “defensive system” is composed of complete dinosaurs whose inital brief was first engineered in the 1950s in the cold war gainst Russia, and has failed to see the next technological innovation which is quickly making nuclear subs a thing of the past.
Lumbering defenseless nukesubs will not survive against an attack by the next generation of automonmous aquatic drones.
A low estimate for the cost of ONE nuclear submarine is in the region of £31billion. Ask yourself how many aquatic drones could be built to counter it for the same price?
It was Francis Bacon who became the greatest herald of the Modern Age when he that declared that “knowledge is power”–meaning power over nature.
The central question for deciding what is true became “does it work?” Once this question was accepted as the ultimate criteria of truth, metaphysics and theology were rendered irrelevant to matters of public truth and technological power.
Following this proposition as an assumption, David Hume could assert “No ‘is’ is an ought”. Reason and knowledge were now free from the restrictions and fantasies of speculative thought and religious power.
Only problem is: by conquering nature we are destroying it. And in destroying nature we are destroying ourselves. Hence the decline.
The CCP is far far far far more than a mere “perceived economic threat” – the CCP certainly hopes it is and pronounces its intentions to be - now largely controlling America.
AUKUS allows for AU to abandon its former ridiculous ancient and failed submarine plan with the French - already costing billions with no end in sight, no progress being made, and Chinese security issues built in.
Making any agreement with O’Biden and Johnson is all but pointless on any issue but in this one case - it allows for AU to leave a far worse situation.
I was a little surprised that the CCP allowed O’Biden to make the deal - perhaps they have something even worse planned.
So your brightest thought is that bombers should be abandoned in favor of drones?
Maybe tanks should give way to RC-HumVees?
Why not just make your entire defense system remote controlled nanobots.
There were several viable reasons to dump the French deal and not include the French in the AUKUS alliance but the most important was that with the French involved we’d be called FAUKUS.
.
To get this thread back on track: Is the West in decline? Absolutely.
Of course there are countless ways you can measure decline but for me it’s pretty basic.
1: Is the average person gaining more power over their personal lives or are they being robbed of their power by governments and corporations?
2. Is the standard of living for the average person increasing or decreasing?
To me, it’s obvious. From around the 1980/90’s the average person has had to work more, for less. Since then, the standard of living has decreased even though there have been massive technological advances that have increased productivity (at least 10 times on average), prolonged life and made life somewhat more comfortable.
Again, I’m talking about basic stuff. Around the 1950/60’s the average man could buy a large home, in a great location and raise half a dozen kids on ONE wage (which my parents did) but today you need two people working if you want to buy a home half the size and support one or two children.
These are the fundamentals and I don’t care how ‘cool’ the latest technology is or if we can now live an extra 5 years on a concoction of medications, if the fundamentals aren’t right, then we aren’t ‘progressing’.
What’s this got to do with religion? Not much as far as I’m concerned. It has everything to do with moral and ethical priorities that put the well-being of humans before economic systems and political ideologies. Capitalism and socialism are simply human farming systems. Humans should not be discarded when a system fails; the system should be discarded.
.
What is causing the decline in the West? The mindset of egocentric materialism. It is not an attitude of one for all and all for one. It’s me-ism.
I saw a radical change when the idealism of the young in the 1960s morphed to the materialism of the 1980s. Moccasins were traded for designer tennis shoes.
Jeans became designer and had to be name brand. The t.v. show "Family Ties’ captured the change with a materialistic child having “hippie” parents. I watched in dismay as my children sold out to the prevailing mindset out of fear of not belonging among their peers. I was outdated.
A liberal/capitalist establishment is able to co-opt, exploit, absorb, utilize, transform, corrupt and manipulate every grassroots movement until it reaches it’s limit and morphs into something else.
All systems from East to West are in decline, subservient to a power and wealth complex. Though there has always been corruption, the political, the economic and not least, the ethical cease to be viable pillars upholding nations who have relinquished the fight against their own corruption while hypocritically affirming the opposite. Also, if truth be told, far too many stupid people on the planet; among the worst are the educated holding most of the power positions in conformity with the organizations they serve. We’re slaves to a system we can’t seem to escape from, while turning evermore ineffective and corrupt.
All one has to do is observe the world. Nature itself is being corrupted with the infections WE created! Not much is left of what hasn’t gone wrong! Even our ideals are sinking with the ship replaced by more irrational versions of what they used to be. The time may come when the majority of humans will not decide anything except to survive.
“I can remember when “liberal” was a respected word.”-- My mentor. (respected as in a liberal college)
“The times they are a -changing”–Dylan’
Century 21 embraces a new, radical conservatism that is supported by evangelical Christians, polluting both religion in general and politics in particular. It is s another attempt to to glorify and preserve wholesale exploitation of man and nature–a side effect of the enlightenment.
“Things are in the saddle and ride mankind.”-- Emerson, in a letter to his friend Channing.
“The time is out of Joint”–Hamlet
“An old bitch gone in the teeth. . . a botched civilization.”–Ezra Pound.
The first step toward fixing a problem is to recognize that a problem exists.
I think materialistic capitalism’s immediate rewards obscures the fact of its toxic side effects causing one to look away from the problem.
Overlooked, the problem grows.
Only half-acknowledged doesn’t solve the problem. A full acknowledgement by the powers that be wouldn’t be expedient. Procrastination therefore is the ritual outcome. Expect the problem to keep going!
Monad is right. The power of most of us as individuals is insufficient to make the necessary systemic changes to correct the environmental problems. To whatever efforts we’re making to change the situation, we should add acceptance of it.
It was because I saw the question as a spiritual one that it is here. It isn’t just what people do but why they do it, what motivates them, what values do they have, and by what do they orientate their lives? I think that these are the more important questions, because they show the chances of recovery based on one’s worldview.
It is the ideals that are in question here. Do people have ideals that could be helpful in recovery? Or is the mentality more (as Germans say) “after me the deluge for all I care”?
