Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bradland t1_j33q4r1 wrote

Futurology is a challenging topic. What we know, concretely, about the future isn't usually all that exciting, and there isn't that much news about it on the daily. The real accomplishments are incremental, and the future prospects are fraught with risk. It's much easier to shoot down a novel idea than to construct a robust one. So the fight for discussions about the future end up stacked in favor of those who will use what we know at present to tear it down.

What you end up with is a stream of prognostications that are rampant speculation, and this is the realm of utopias and dystopias. Humans seem to prefer to read opinions that occupy the far ends of the spectrum. Reasonable, moderate viewpoints read like milquetoast punditry, so they don't garner interest. This creates a feedback loop that reinforces the negative behavior that we're here to complain about. I'm not really sure how to solve it.

151

ecidnaemelia t1_j33xgjf wrote

You sure do know how to describe it.

44

bradland t1_j33xtbn wrote

Thanks, sometimes the words just flow and I even enjoy reading them back to myself later. Other times I wish I had kept my mouth shut lol

24

[deleted] t1_j34aelk wrote

[removed]

3

bradland t1_j34fa8q wrote

Haha, I mean, you’re not far off. I am more of an entrepreneur, but I’m a proficient Rubyist. If I am on the spectrum, it is undiagnosed, but it wouldn’t surprise me.

2

strvgglecity t1_j343g9z wrote

You sure know how to avoid saying "all the world's scientists agree we fucked up the whole planet, and no policy makers are listening, so realistically a futurology sub should discuss what is actually being predicted about our future based on the best data available, and not pie in the sky hopes and dreams from corporations selling robots to deliver tacos or whatever the fuck"

edit: not meant as an attack - just a reality check on why the sub attracts both users and content that appears "negative", when in fact it is just reality.

11

SaintsNoah t1_j34apzn wrote

This is literally one of the extremes he's describing. It's all "just reality" to someone whose viewpoint aligns with such.

1

strvgglecity t1_j358mpc wrote

Reality is not a viewpoint. It is a set of conclusions arrived based on the analysis of data. It's not formulated based on emotion or hope, fear or prejudice.

0

strvgglecity t1_j34buua wrote

You just described scientists' estimates based on the best available information and data to be "an extreme". If you don't listen to scientific consensus, where does your basis for futurology come from? Please reevaluate your perceptions.

−2

SaintsNoah t1_j35s6f6 wrote

"no policymakers are listening" is blatant hyperbole. A falsehood, even.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement

2

strvgglecity t1_j35xsnd wrote

"no" is hyperbole. True. "Few" is accurate. Every time a western nation makes a pledge, it couples it with opposite actions like increased oil drilling or natural gas exporting (for duh economy). Emissions are still rising each year. Local leaders are still pushing development in rapidly declining desert ecosystems. Building housing developments in hurricane alleys and floodplains. There is progress, but it is almost always one step forward, two steps back, with the trend line unchanged.

You're simply unwilling to accept the facts as determined by data. When you call peer-reviewed data-based analysis "extreme", you make clear you're not serious.

2

maywander47 t1_j34b7g8 wrote

What we fucked up is the way we've been living. Life will go on. It just won't be like it's been.

0

strvgglecity t1_j34bk5v wrote

Nobody doubts that life will go on. The discussion is about human society.

−2

maywander47 t1_j39y8cu wrote

Human society will survive, it just won't be like it has for the last couple of hundred years. Weather variability is going to be a chief driver, forcing agriculture to change drastically and the built environment as well.

1

strvgglecity t1_j3a5hw9 wrote

Most of the world's climate scientists disagree with you. Society will collapse. It is almost one inevitable now. I don't know how you can look at the data, combined with our own first hand observations of daily occurrences, and believe that the systems we have today will be functional in 50 years.

1

christiandb t1_j33z4w6 wrote

disrupting the feedback loop incrementally? injecting enough of a counter argument to bring it back to center?

Its a tall, time consuming task, but centering the mind through ideas is meticulous and thankless often confrontational and aggressive but overtime youll see a shift and not have to sway things so hard to have a decent dialogue.

This is why I like debates, both sides are helping each other find the truth, not necessarily be right. Problem with social media, its become a battleground of perspectives and ideas none of which has any basis on reality other than a blurb of impact on an infinite news cycle. Its a distraction with no real purpose when it started off as a great tool to communicate with different minds across the globe.

2

ThriceFive t1_j343mvw wrote

So well put bradland - and describes an ongoing issue with modern media in general. The more moderate and interesting discussion is often farther down in the thread.

2

maywander47 t1_j349gix wrote

Great post. Dealing with facts, and trying to project them into the future is hard. People are lazy and it's easier to repeat opinions, even if baseless

2