Debate: Can Humanity survive our technolgical infancy?
Side: Woe for Us

People are not addicted to medicines as you claim.This one right here ruined your credibility.Nuclear weapons are no longer being used as a deterrent factor and most countries have agreed to not use them in war so the point of how powerful they are is not an issue if they are never usedAgreement shmagreement!If somebody wants to get rid of a peoples enough - like the Palestinians against Israel, or Hitler against the Jews - they'll use it!Man has always made his livelihood of technology a horse and plow are a type of technological tool as is a hoe, sickle, and any other farm instrument you can possibly devise. As long as there are people there will always be technological advancement.I didn't say that there would be not. However, I believe that, as Einstein said, "it has become appallingly clear that our technology has surpassed our humanity." That is, we need to revert back to primitive states of technological development whenever it becomes all-too-clear that technology has become too powerful.Feudalism was an extremely oppressive and violent form of government with wars constantly being fought with neighboring lords over land and resources. Poverty ran rampant and the overall standard of living was low unless you were a lord. Did I say to go back to feudalism?Actually, I usually alternate between libertarianism and anarchism.Your last reply shows how easily misguided and ignorant many people can be today. The best way to start a sentence is to not do so with an insult, especially one which you cannot satisfactorily prove.You assume that humanity is not part of nature but separated from itNo, I do not.However, unlike most humans, I realize that there is more to this planet than humanity - that humans only care about themselves/their profit.Your statement that the world has declined drastically, I believe that it is an insult to the world as a whole the world is getting along fineYou must be blind and deaf. I could, and I'm sure I have before, list many, many things about this world which I, and many others, loathe. However, whether or not these 'advancements' are good or not are a matter of personal opinion. If your opinion on this matter differs from mine, than you shall continue to argue that these 'advancements' are good, and I, bad.You cannot stop change as change is the only constant in this world.But you can regress. We may end up at the same place (i.e. current conditions), but it wouldn't be for quite some time and it would, in the end, possibly prolong humanity's existence.If you are talking about the environment, then I take it you must live under a rock and have never been outside.I go outside all the time, and I am each time besieged with pollution and disease.e talking about the environment, then I take it you must live under a rock and have never been outside. On the deforestation of the rain forest for instance, while i agree it is a travesty and could be handled with more care, we are along way off from completely destroying it and continue to make great strides in the conservation and preservation of the areas in question. Another typical example of human arrogance.While it may be good that the whole of the rain forests/wooded areas have yet to be depleted, the fact remains that we are destroying many species as a result of our thoughtless destruction.Lastly on you statement of prolonging the earths existence, how would limiting humanity prolong the existence of the earth?Humans can destroy the world - or rather, those who live on the world - and as such ought be limited or eradicated for the purpose of preserving said world.The earth is a massive ball of rock and at the current time, we do not have the capability or the resources to destroy such a thing.We don't?If you read the post-note, you will know that I, along with others, agree that your's truly ought be a science fiction writer. As such - as well as my being an INTJ - my mind will come up with scenario after scenario instantaneously to provide you with various plots which could destroy the earth. However, please be advised that I used the term 'destroy the earth' as a colloquialism and was not intended to be read as literally destroying/the destruction of the earth, but rather of the majority of the life which lives on it.Nuclear weapons, for one.P.S. I understand the ignorance of the Middle Ages perhaps better than most people; for instance, did you know that the common belief was that weasels gave birth through their ears? Right ear for males, left ear for females!