I like your idea of GOATS and Thomas Paine was, and is, a hero; but to bring together your luminaries (and I'd switch out Harry and Meghan for King Charles) to tell the Universe Story seems unlikely. For that to happen, I remain convinced that humanity needs to experience and even expect Disaster. The whole world needs to be collectively shocked by what we have become and how we are living on this planet. The only alternative to Disaster with sufficient weight to bring about such a complete reorientation of thought is undeniable extraterrestrial visitation akin to "Divine Intervention", and in such a way that we are awed and humbled by the experience rather than further riled up.
I think you're right about King Charles. For whatever his downsides, poor prince we've gotten to see him as, he's always had refreshingly enlightened positions about the world. And we are on the same page but slightly askew in that if disaster got even worse that it is, it would be one from which we likely could not recover. But Paul, the disaster we're in has to be serous enough to convince people it's a game changer. That's what's there for us to work with. And let's hope, if it gets too bad here there's an intervention from the galactic whatever it is. Just think of the excitement of puzzling over that instead of trying to stop bombs from falling.
Suzanne, the disaster we are in evidently is not serious or sufficient enough to bring about a radical change. I pray we do not have Disaster but I see our civilization as being comparable to the Titanic going full-steam without really knowing what lies beneath the surface in these increasingly dICEy waters, and no one with any sense is at the helm.
No argument. It's a race as to whether something serious enough to get us changing happens before there's something serious enough to wipe us out. Now, there's so much breakdown, with wars and borders and looming natural disasters and failure of political institutions, there's at least grist for trying to get that switch to happen while we can try.
Paul and Suzanne, I was reading your comments about the world being terrible and heading for disaster and my first thought was... "based on which metric?" Since google is apparently reading our thoughts now, a youtube video popped up this morning showing a debate about this subject. Stephen Pinker argues that since the enlightenment the world has never been better, while John Mearsheimer argues those gains are at the cost of truth and morality. Interesting chat, here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA-tCQJEzqk&t=564&ab_channel=TheInstituteofArtandIdeas
Maybe examples will also pop up about strange ladies trying to saving the world...??? I hear Pinker being talked about not so kindly by people on our wavelength, which has surprised me since I thought of him as a leading intellectual as the linguist he is. I'm glad to have a chance to check that out. Stay tuned for further commentary.
I like your idea of GOATS and Thomas Paine was, and is, a hero; but to bring together your luminaries (and I'd switch out Harry and Meghan for King Charles) to tell the Universe Story seems unlikely. For that to happen, I remain convinced that humanity needs to experience and even expect Disaster. The whole world needs to be collectively shocked by what we have become and how we are living on this planet. The only alternative to Disaster with sufficient weight to bring about such a complete reorientation of thought is undeniable extraterrestrial visitation akin to "Divine Intervention", and in such a way that we are awed and humbled by the experience rather than further riled up.
I think you're right about King Charles. For whatever his downsides, poor prince we've gotten to see him as, he's always had refreshingly enlightened positions about the world. And we are on the same page but slightly askew in that if disaster got even worse that it is, it would be one from which we likely could not recover. But Paul, the disaster we're in has to be serous enough to convince people it's a game changer. That's what's there for us to work with. And let's hope, if it gets too bad here there's an intervention from the galactic whatever it is. Just think of the excitement of puzzling over that instead of trying to stop bombs from falling.
Suzanne, the disaster we are in evidently is not serious or sufficient enough to bring about a radical change. I pray we do not have Disaster but I see our civilization as being comparable to the Titanic going full-steam without really knowing what lies beneath the surface in these increasingly dICEy waters, and no one with any sense is at the helm.
No argument. It's a race as to whether something serious enough to get us changing happens before there's something serious enough to wipe us out. Now, there's so much breakdown, with wars and borders and looming natural disasters and failure of political institutions, there's at least grist for trying to get that switch to happen while we can try.
Paul and Suzanne, I was reading your comments about the world being terrible and heading for disaster and my first thought was... "based on which metric?" Since google is apparently reading our thoughts now, a youtube video popped up this morning showing a debate about this subject. Stephen Pinker argues that since the enlightenment the world has never been better, while John Mearsheimer argues those gains are at the cost of truth and morality. Interesting chat, here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA-tCQJEzqk&t=564&ab_channel=TheInstituteofArtandIdeas
Maybe examples will also pop up about strange ladies trying to saving the world...??? I hear Pinker being talked about not so kindly by people on our wavelength, which has surprised me since I thought of him as a leading intellectual as the linguist he is. I'm glad to have a chance to check that out. Stay tuned for further commentary.