The modern life and mental illness

But this statement implies the underlying assumption that mental illness is purely genetic and manifests itself in any environment.

Technology has its limitations. It seems to only benefit the privaliged few. We have been unable to feed them "all". Many are starving today. "Better Lives" seems relative. Better Lives does not have to be linked to technology. That is more of the Jetson - Flintstone myth.

Many are starving, but they are decreasing. I read once extreme poverty was reduced by a half (as a percentage) in the last couple of decades. As long as people get their basic needs they are fine. Transition does not occur from extreme poverty to the "privileged" class instantaneously. Efforts continue to eradicate poverty, and it is possible. The problem is more political than technological. We have 1 billion people in extreme poverty now, but the majority (5/7 %) are around the mean, who have things that the richest of the 19th century and for the most part of the 20th century didn't have, like access to health care and vaccines, cars, TVs, cellphones, ... etc. This what counts statistically speaking.

I would suggest to watch for Hans Rosling a renowned Swedish statistician.

I got slow connection for a one hour video. However watching what I can, it seems to be so much propaganda.

The reality is, the Earth is limited in size and resources. 11 billion survive at what price? Seems like this guy is really promoting cheap labor for the ruling class.

@ the 35 min mark in the video, he leaves out some critical facts, and make some blind assumptions. He seems to have a narrow view of the world and its dangers and problems.

@ the 45 min mark, I had to shut him off_. His constant cackling drove me nuts, and I got bored and tuned him out. Only thing he did prove, is that the human species is very adaptable. That is true. But his supposition about technology is only half thought out. Humans always used some technology to survive, even it it was just a spear. At 11 billion it will not be enough. Even our technology has its limits. His words about primitive cultures are only half truths. This guy only sees half the picture.

What about the fact that extreme poverty was halved in the last 20 years or so. Is that a good evidence that things are getting better? What is your evidence that things aren't getting better by the way?

Has it?? I wonder...

Things have gotten "Better" for some in a limited way. But not for all. Remember that green ball that dropped on his nice little animated graph? He said it was because of that big earthquake in Dec. 2004. That falling ball is a Warning, that he is ignoring! As the world population nears 11 billion, those little green balls will be falling like rain, off that cute little graph of his.

In those over populated Asian countries, the so called "better" off, are in a very delicate situation, and are highly subject to natural and human forces. I really do not think they are so "better off"....

OK, now I see. So, you deny the statistics and accusing great statisticians as propagandists (I wonder propaganda for what!!!)? Extreme poverty was halved is a statistical fact, if you have another view I am glad to see some statistics for this regard not what you think personally about it. Then, you take from the video what confirms your view and ignore what doesn't. The video showed a shift in the income to the better for most people, and this is a statistical fact. Some set backs occurred/will occur but the overall trend is for the better for sure, like the violence in the world is going down as the statistics shows. As for the Asian countries, actually most of this extreme poverty eradicated in India and China (=Asia). Now the problem is in Africa mainly. But as technology arrives there with some political stability, every thing will be just fine.

Every thing will not be "Just Fine".

Your "great statistician" has a very narrow minded view of humanity. "Extreme Poverty" still exists. As the world population nears 11 million, stress increases. Those economies in Asia are already stressed and are very unstable. China rich ruling class is pumping billions into to the Chinese markets to pump them up, and prevent collapse. They can't do that forever. We are seeing the Warning signs now. The top heavy government of China will topple, much violence will follow. Over population will add even more stress on resources and on their economies. When that happens more little green balls will fall of his pat little graph. Over population will push already unstable stressed societies past the breaking points. Your great statistician is not seeing the whole human picture.

Violence will explode in those collapsing economies and cultures. I am not even talking about what natural disasters will do to these stressed over populated areas. Those disasters will cause even more of those little green balls to fall off that nice graph. Large sea level stressed populations are very subject to natural disasters. Many will die needlessly. Remember that 2004 earthquake ball??

Those shift in income numbers are shallow. They may be true, but that is not enough to prop up unstable economies and cultures. Those small income increases will vanish with the slightest down ward changes.

Your great statistician is not seeing the whole picture. His propaganda is promoting modern technology, corporate control in the world.

I am not going any further in this discussion, because I am talking about the future by extrapolating what has happened, which I think is a more reasonable approach, while you are talking about what might happen by neglecting the present facts or making them unreliable.

You can keep "extrapolating" all you like. I am seeing the broader picture. Statistics does not always cover the whole picture, only just a small part of it. Thus I question what is the more reasonable approach. I watched most of your video, now try watching my video:



Koyaanisqatsi

You think you see the broader picture. Statistics by definition cover large number of samples, and they talk about what has happened, not what will happen. Predicting the future involves too many parameters to make it predictable, so the best we can do is to rely on the past and extrapolate.

Not quite sure what the expectation was of members responding to this thread? Philosophical discussions tend to get messy and this thread is no exception.

This Q&A forum is for:

This subject may be more acceptable in the Current Events & News Forum if you find a link to a news item that discusses the topic.

This thread is now being closed.