Is species betrayal a valid concept? - Or is extinction okay?

Are there people that think it is okay to give up on future generations in order to have a more comfortable, gratifying life?

How does this compare to soldiers that have given their lives to our constitution, which is primarily dedicated to protecting life and the unalienable rights it depends on?

What kind of instincts is a traitor to our species operating with, if such a concept is valid? Do those of us who are not entertaining betrayal have an option for influencing those that are betraying, if such is possible? Or, is the entire nation devoid of the instinct to survive and protect future generations with our of love for their potential happiness. Is this obsolete in modern America?

If love for our children and their generations in the future is obsolete in America, what caused it? Humans used to care enough to make sacrifices to protect their children. I cannot find very many people at all that will discuss a profound strategy using the intents of the American constitution to protect vital elements, create peace, and correct serious environmental damage, or at least severely limit it in the future. Why is this? What social features cause this? What instincts do they appeal to to create this social dysfunction, if indeed we do have an instinct to survive that future generations can count on?

 

Are there people that think it is okay to give up on future generations in order to have a more comfortable, gratifying life?

YES.

 

Agreed. I've seen it and heard it from people. What about the next question posed?

And, is it ethical for those of us opposing extinction with reasonable degrees of shared sacrifice to seek to influence those okay with extinction?

 

"""Are there people that think it is okay to give up on future generations in order to have a more comfortable, gratifying life?""


YUPPERS! ME! I fought the fight and now it's time for the youngsters to take over ….

 

Are you kidding? The average American with their inability to save cannot even delay instant gratification enough to better their own life 20 years down the road. How should they be able to even think about their own kids in 50 years down the road, let alone 3-4 generations down the road?

Humans, unfortunately, only act when they see a direct threat to their existence/lifestyle. That's why it will be impossible to have concerted action on issues like AGW, for example, because the threat of catastrophic changes to the environment 100 years down the road is too distant for people to think about, even though it could affect their own kids.

That's why the psychology behind tax cuts work. People rather take the easy, "free" tax cut money today instead of keeping the national debt down, which they perceive will only have negative effects 30+ years down the road.

 

At what point does this debt to those unborn begin and end? How much is it and did our forebears ever act that way toward us?

By the logic you are proposing we should never be able to use any resources and nor should our descendants. Indeed, we should all head pell-mell back to the caves, eschewing our heated homes and the benefits of world trade for the good of future generations who will themselves feel obligated to huddle over small fires so their great-great grandsires can do the same. When in the far reaches of the geologic future aliens from other worlds arrive here they will say. "boy, too bad they all died, but they sure left a lot of oil for us, okay, get the derricks up."

Look, the reason we have petroleum today is we ran out of Whale oil, and when we run out of that, (as we in fact ARE doing still) we WILL find something else, (my bet is on Fusion, but solar, etc does appear a going thing too). It's what we've always done and, really, it's what we humans DO. YOU'RE the "species traitor" here. You're telling us we have no right to be ourselves.

 

Desiring comfort leads to extinction?

 

Placing wants over needs leads to extinction in our case.

 

Myopia and greed, exacerbated by selfishness.
But don't think that most parents are as careless about their kids' future as the self-indulgent, immature modern Americans that you describe.

 

Ahh, but you have knowledge and experience, and it is not really a fight, it is a test of our ability to source eternal instinct.

This is the real question hidden in the rest.

 

I like your perspective. It is accurate, but, deficient.

Imagine what the PURPOSE of free speech would do to our society in a fairly short period of time. Yea, I know you have no experience with that PURPOSE as a societal feature, but still, should be able to understand the question. I will provide some description of the function of that purpose which is general.

Secrecy will cease to be the norm, and education will be done by the people for the people using national television media and the usenet returned. Here is the complete, but summarized legal process. http://algoxy.com/law/lawfulpeacefulrevolution.html

 

Quantifying the eternal is a big job. I doubt you could follow it for long. I only say that because you ask. Our forebearers did enough to get us where we are with its various potentials. We have options. Which will you choose?

I'm certain you cannot find a statement in my posting that actually says that. You, not considering time, have chosen to present that it all happens very fast, or not fast enough for nature to compensate. Or, for our choices to include the time nature need to compensate.

Hmm, it seems you do not know of the conspiracy in southern California which removed all small rail and trolleys, at a time when the population considered the automobile to be dirty, dangerous and noisy.

Your posting is prone to generalizations which are cognitive distortions. I'm telling you that you have an instinct to survive and providing a way to use it. You are presenting that you have the option to ignore the option, and that others should consider your opinion worthy. Ummm.

 

You retired from being part of our society?

What happened?

 

I contributed for 65 years to "society", paid all my bills, never declared bankruptcy, conserved land, was kind, didn't cheat on my taxes and recycled.....now I get a well earned rest from "involvement"....let those with more time and energy take over...

 

I agree, but would add that the myopia is induced by exploitation of wants and desires, instincts. Medl ia does it for profit, another want. I also agree that the models of "self indulgent, immature modern Americans" are described, but that those models are also widely glorified by media. Ending the abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech will end that immoral and unethical exploitation.

 

You're still here contributing what you believe.

I would hope you haven't reversed your behavior on paying bills, bankruptcy, conservancy, and the rest.

I'm not suggesting you have to start another business or become a soldier.

 

The critical thing is understanding HOW humans can organize to get off a path that leads to extinction, and then share that. Sharing what works takes far less time than what does not. There is a simple agreement upon constitutional intent which is natural law that Americans can make that will have a profound effect. Can you accept them?

1) We have the right to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights.

2) If the framers intended for Americans to alter or abolish then they intended that free speech have the ultimate PURPOSE of enabling the peoples unity under law needed to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights.

 

\
You're reading waaaaayyyy too much into what I wrote...sorry, not interested...

 

Half the population has an IQ of less than 100.

 

It is programmed into us, to disregard the future. For the present. For after all, Maslows hierarchy of needs, says it all. Comfort, for YOURSELF, comes before all others. And actualization, which include self sacrifice for future generations, is at the tip of the pyramid. And rare indeed.

And, the right wing, intends to make you all afraid and coveteous. They amplify ME FIRST and only, well maybe family, to an art form.

 

Okay, so the half with an IQ over 100 could discuss and agree upon things vital to survival. It doesn't take over 100 IQ to use information that is socially vetted and accepted with solid reason. In fact, it is normal that surviving societies are guided in this way.

 

I don't think people on the lower end are as good at seeing value in long-term goals.

The same people that will accept something they read on some crackpot website, will turn around and claim hard science is a Chinese conspiracy. Look at the level of anti-intelligence we see today in the Republican Party. What do you do with people who place great value on being stupid?

The only hope is to save the planet in spite of them.

 

AMEN!!!

Another example is the decision to wrap oneself in the thrill of war, striking the vengeance of OUR God upon those who don't agree...
... vs. using diplomacy, which succeeds only over time.

 

Here is how you save the planet in spite of people who don't care. You make the long-term interests of the planet coincide with their immediate short-term interests. It's Judo - use your opponent's strength and momentum against them.

Take for example, fuels derived from algae. That is the best and only real option to petro fuels. Fuels from algae are carbon neutral and can be used in everything from motorcycles, to ships and aircraft. The key is the price at the pump. You can't expect people to pay more for the good of the planet. What we have to do is make algae fuels cheaper than gasoline. When that happens, you don't need anyone's good intentions. They will buy the cheaper fuel.

I have designed systems for industry and for some public applications for 30 years now. You have to design equipment to be idiot proof. It doesn't matter how many safeties you put into a design. People will try to defeat every single one. So you have to make things as fail-safe as possible. You have to assume the worst intentions of the operators. Even if they put themselves in danger, they will try their best to get around anything they can. It is the nature of solutions to problems. They have to be idiot proof and require no good intentions.

 

Wanna bet? Liberal parents are often very careless about their kids' future - easily demonstrated in their (parental) support of idiotic college 'degrees', which do not guarantee ANY work, much less work for life,