Are new generations necessary for intellectual progress?

[AngryGroceries]

I may be using 'intellectual progress' in the wrong way, but here's the idea;

My grandparents are still sightly racist, my parents aren't racist at all, and racism for me is just some strange thing to exist.

Say there's some idea or school of thought that an older generation settles in that is extremely difficult to change for them; it often takes a new generation to fully accept different contradictory information and ways of living.

My question is:

If we discovered how to make people live for thousands of years would the unwillingness (to change world views) of one long-lived generation slow human progress significantly? How beneficial is it for new generations to accept new ideas more readily?

[Autumnleaf]

There are reasons why some people are racist. When white people are a minority in the US you will come to understand them acutely.

It did take several generations to indoctrinate the young to accept the way things are today. The World War II generation would never have let things get this bad socially, morally or financially.

[AngryGroceries]

...The World War II era had a very similar economic crisis, and things have only gotten worse socially if you're a white male. Morals are subjective, so I have no comment on that.

[Jalex]

Yes, there is a reason why youngsters are needed, and that is because they react to what is happening in their reality. "Music in my times was better", we all defend our beliefs and what we have decided is good, so new generations come and question us, "is it really good?" "good for whom?" "under which circumstances?", life is full of motion. If things remained the same then no need for new people.

Back to your example. Who decides what is racism? You are not racist or you think you are not racist? What about a new generation with no-race concept?

(Racism is a bad example. I hae heard "I am not a racist" and then a "I don't find girls out of my race attractive"... that is racism.... )

[Autumnleaf]

...The World War II era had a very similar economic crisis, and things have only gotten worse socially if you're a white male. Morals are subjective, so I have no comment on that.

There are many children of divorce and divorced people and children of crack addicts who have it hard. Its not just the white man feeling the pain, although he is facing the vanguard of the white minority situation. That is going to be a real eye opener. It started with affirmative action and open door immigration. It will end in chaos.

[AngryGroceries]

There are many children of divorce and divorced people and children of crack addicts who have it hard. Its not just the white man feeling the pain, although he is facing the vanguard of the white minority situation. That is going to be a real eye opener. It started with affirmative action and open door immigration. It will end in chaos.

Divorce is more common, yes, but that's not a sign of social decay; it could be said to be many things, like a general increase in independent thought. People now see marraige as more of a partnership that can be voided if things go sour, rather than a woman bonding herself to a man. I see the former as better as it allows more personal freedom. My parents divorced, they were miserable together and are happier apart; the absence of constant contention made it much more pleasant for the children of our family.
Other situations may unfortunately turn out more negative, but I'm pointing out that divorce isn't always a negative.

Its not just the white man feeling the pain, although he is facing the vanguard of the white minority situation.
I don't know enough on that subject to say too much other than it looked like slight overcompensation rather than total white oppression.


Yes, there is a reason why youngsters are needed, and that is because they react to what is happening in their reality. "Music in my times was better", we all defend our beliefs and what we have decided is good, so new generations come and question us, "is it really good?" "good for whom?" "under which circumstances?", life is full of motion. If things remained the same then no need for new people.

Or things would remain the same in the absence of new people.

I want to ask;
What if for some reason the generations from the 1600s were preserved until today? Where would humanity be?
but it could be said to happen in lots of different ways.

Back to your example. Who decides what is racism? You are not racist or you think you are not racist? What about a new generation with no-race concept?

(Racism is a bad example. I hae heard "I am not a racist" and then a "I don't find girls out of my race attractive"... that is racism.... ) Hmm, I think I agree that racism is a bad example. I don't have any barrier against being attracted to other races, but would you say being attracted to redheads is racist against people of different hair colors?

[zibber]

Was there always racism, everywhere in the world?

[ktgrey]

Well, it is said that science advances one funeral at a time, as the adherents of older theories die off, so I guess in that field new generations are indeed necessary for intellectual progress.

[Certain]

I'd say partly generational and partly experiential. If people continue to have the same reinforcing experiences their attitudes are not likely to change.

[Odie]

Hell no. Heeelllll no. No. Meow. The average person gives up on life real early on, they just kinda stay alive doing random tasks and enjoying themselves as much as they can afford. Intellectual progress is not on their agenda lol. What do you think the world would be like if all the great minds weren't caged by limitations on age? By god, UTOPIA!

But seriously, there are various theories in the ether that suggest humanity is currently chained by it's mortality. Not in the ultimate sense of mortality, we'll all die eventually, the universe will decay into radio noise then nothingness no matter what - but in the sense of our extremely limited life-spans. The idea goes that, knowing our lives are so small, the universe so large, the common response is to essentially give up and screw around, enjoying ourselves till death do us part. So, people don't bother doing anything. They especially don't bother doing anything that's hard, which is the most rewarding.


And, as it's a very important subject to me that is infact related to this conversation, morality - for the love of all things holy under our great lord Thor - is not subjective. It can be misused to become subjective. But it's foundation is in objective reality, should such a thing exist. Ha.

[Haumea]

Race and racism is this complex subject that sorta gets boiled down to the ridiculous (either, well there are no races at all, or there are no quantifiable differences between races, or any differences are due strictly to environmental conditions and the social order, etc.)

I think your generation needs to stop congratulating itself over how enlightened you are because in most cases you are simply being fed feel-good pabulum on the issue.

It is a complex subject that requires real thought and reflection and subtlety, something I do not see a lot of from many twentysomethings. Instead it's this self-congratulatory moralizing, where you can feel superior to your elders at little cost.

[Paji eh Wong]

I agree with Haumea.

We may be showing some intellectual/moral change, but that is inevitable.

Intellectual/moral growth, however, is not.

[obnoxious]

Well what kind of intellectual progress are we talking about?

In physics and mathematics, I think there will always be those periods of stagnation until the next Copernicus or Newton comes along with paradigm-shifting theories. It seems like we're in one of those lulls now. I mean, we have a larger population, but maybe it's just churning out a higher percentage of average folk... or maybe these fields just aren't as enticing anymore... that's a different thread maybe.

If we're talking about technological progress, in fields such as nanotechnology (in all its applicable areas), bio tech, neuro and computer science, etc. it seems to me that

1. With these fields growing alongside the population, a larger amount of people entering these fields means incremental, but rapid advancements. IE. more minds are beneficial, not necessarily new ones.

2. The advancements in technology really do increase exponentially, with more powerful tech opening more doors at once, ie. the tech is doing the innovating/suggesting the way on its own, new minds aren't exactly needed.

^^Obviously a concern with this is, with everyone racing to 'get there' first and design the next killer app, despite more powerful tech warranting a higher level of caution, nobody will stop and ask what the most beneficial applications are and it could snowball in an unfavorable direction - profit > ethics.

^^^And with that being the prevailing mentality this generation has to grapple with (whereas it used to be gender and racial equality, and of course the lashing out at the man in the 60s) is it simply a matter of new generations shifting course? It may be harder now, as it's a deeply ingrained mentality of our culture, and more and more products allowing instant gratification for all senses and desires leads to a less concerned/revolutionary populace. You know the movie Wall-E? That seems realistic

[AngryGroceries]

Race and racism is this complex subject that sorta gets boiled down to the ridiculous (either, well there are no races at all, or there are no quantifiable differences between races, or any differences are due strictly to environmental conditions and the social order, etc.)

I think your generation needs to stop congratulating itself over how enlightened you are because in most cases you are simply being fed feel-good pabulum on the issue.

It is a complex subject that requires real thought and reflection and subtlety, something I do not see a lot of from many twentysomethings. Instead it's this self-congratulatory moralizing, where you can feel superior to your elders at little cost.


Humans have a tendency to stick with familiar ideas. It's not really a new generation\old generation issue but more of a 'people' issue.

Once something is accepted by someone it becomes difficult for a new idea to take it's place, whether it's a positive or negative idea. The significance of a 'newer generation' is that because all ideas are new at one point to a person, it removes some familiarity bias towards all these ideas, and sortof levels the playing field between ideas.

Well what kind of intellectual progress are we talking about?

In physics and mathematics, I think there will always be those periods of stagnation until the next Copernicus or Newton comes along with paradigm-shifting theories. It seems like we're in one of those lulls now. I mean, we have a larger population, but maybe it's just churning out a higher percentage of average folk... or maybe these fields just aren't as enticing anymore... that's a different thread maybe.

If we're talking about technological progress, in fields such as nanotechnology (in all its applicable areas), bio tech, neuro and computer science, etc. it seems to me that

1. With these fields growing alongside the population, a larger amount of people entering these fields means incremental, but rapid advancements. IE. more minds are beneficial, not necessarily new ones.

2. The advancements in technology really do increase exponentially, with more powerful tech opening more doors at once, ie. the tech is doing the innovating/suggesting the way on its own, new minds aren't exactly needed.

^^Obviously a concern with this is, with everyone racing to 'get there' first and design the next killer app, despite more powerful tech warranting a higher level of caution, nobody will stop and ask what the most beneficial applications are and it could snowball in an unfavorable direction - profit > ethics.

^^^And with that being the prevailing mentality this generation has to grapple with (whereas it used to be gender and racial equality, and of course the lashing out at the man in the 60s) is it simply a matter of new generations shifting course? It may be harder now, as it's a deeply ingrained mentality of our culture, and more and more products allowing instant gratification for all senses and desires leads to a less concerned/revolutionary populace. You know the movie Wall-E? That seems realistic
Hmm, good point. There is a lot of advancement that happens simply because the quantity of minds available.

is it simply a matter of new generations shifting course?
I think a course analogy is fitting; is one course better than constantly changing courses? Does it matter? Exactly how stagnant is one generation in it's particular course? (of course this isn't like some worldwide or universal 'generation' but I'm oversimplifying it for the purpose of being able to work with it at all)


Hell no. Heeelllll no. No. Meow. The average person gives up on life real early on, they just kinda stay alive doing random tasks and enjoying themselves as much as they can afford. Intellectual progress is not on their agenda lol. What do you think the world would be like if all the great minds weren't caged by limitations on age? By god, UTOPIA!

But seriously, there are various theories in the ether that suggest humanity is currently chained by it's mortality. Not in the ultimate sense of mortality, we'll all die eventually, the universe will decay into radio noise then nothingness no matter what - but in the sense of our extremely limited life-spans. The idea goes that, knowing our lives are so small, the universe so large, the common response is to essentially give up and screw around, enjoying ourselves till death do us part. So, people don't bother doing anything. They especially don't bother doing anything that's hard, which is the most rewarding.


And, as it's a very important subject to me that is infact related to this conversation, morality - for the love of all things holy under our great lord Thor - is not subjective. It can be misused to become subjective. But it's foundation is in objective reality, should such a thing exist. Ha.
Hmm. Yes, we'll soon be capable of extending our lives but we'll still all eventually die, potentially making this entire discussion moot because enough new minds will be added to the point where there's not too much difference in 'generational courses' between everyone's lifespan being 70 years and 150+ years.

[Odie]

Huh?

[Zsych]

I remember I wrote an article on what alien life would have to be like, and time period of generations was one of the issues I had in there... chances to adapt/learn things anew.

I think change (not necessarily progress), would be slowed down by longer generations.

[Wongette]

Well, it is said that science advances one funeral at a time, as the adherents of older theories die off, so I guess in that field new generations are indeed necessary for intellectual progress.

Yes, some of the philosophy of science literature discusses this. Paradigmatic change happens not when people objectively weigh all the data, but when those invested in the existing paradigm die off or retire.

On the other hand, I think there is something to be said for losing absolutely brilliant minds that you know would have continued to contribute in significant ways if they had had longer life spans.

[PThaPhenom]

Personal Disclaimer - I'm black and late twenty something.

I felt as if I could add a unique perspective to this subject. Personally, I believe affirmative action benefits middle to upper class black folk. Many of those who are poor are usually not the ones benefiting from it. They usually don't know the right people or are usually too oblivious to take advantage of the opportunity. With that being said, I think most 20 somethings are clueless and have short attention spans. They buy into this political correctness BS but in actuality life is a little more complex. I honestly wish we could all call each other derogatory names and get it out in the open air. I can sense some people's preconceived notions by looking at their facial expressions at times. I think if we were allowed to berate each other then maybe we might understand the other sides' perspective a little more. Yes, a lot of it might be filled with stupid rhetoric but eventually we'll find the silver lining. Lastly, I think people of all races need to be more personally accountable in America. If I can survive the projects, I'm sure Billy Bob can make it out of the trailer park. After all, on a social economic level we didn't grow up too different. He just may be fooled by slight outward appearances. Money is really the deciding factor in this country and it is how I form my social lens. Race and politics are just smoke and mirrors. All I will say is if one small group divides the much larger base against itself into many smaller groups, then they won't have to worry about being challenged. Especially if they continue to fund entertainment (radio and television) that subliminally programs the masses to follow the leader off of a cliff by way of wasteful and excessive living. There isn't much time spent promoting effective messages on a mass wide level. They are mostly superficial and teach nothing of much substance. Most parents are oblivious to the exact messages being communicated; therefore, there is a generational gap in communication. That is why the youth is dumb and parents don't understand why. By the way, there is a problem when a five year old child can hear strip club music 3 pm in the afternoon on the radio. A parent can't possibly catch that all the time. The FCC has been on vacation the last 10 yrs.

[Odie]

Hehe, keep hoping for verbal abuse to be a commonplace thing. Domineering behavior requires tight restriction least it's misused. However, my experience in construction and interwebs will tell you that it's all the fun in the world, in the right hands. Get two raging idiots together however, and you have yourself a hot mess.

[Autumnleaf]

Race and racism is this complex subject that sorta gets boiled down to the ridiculous (either, well there are no races at all, or there are no quantifiable differences between races, or any differences are due strictly to environmental conditions and the social order, etc.)

I think your generation needs to stop congratulating itself over how enlightened you are because in most cases you are simply being fed feel-good pabulum on the issue.

It is a complex subject that requires real thought and reflection and subtlety, something I do not see a lot of from many twentysomethings. Instead it's this self-congratulatory moralizing, where you can feel superior to your elders at little cost.

I saw this behavior among many highly educated white men when Obama got elected to the Presidency. It deeply reinforced my belief in educated morons. I think it goes along with what you were saying the other day about universities indoctrinating students.

[AngryGroceries]

I saw this behavior among many highly educated white men when Obama got elected to the Presidency. It deeply reinforced my belief in educated morons. I think it goes along with what you were saying the other day about universities indoctrinating students.

Hmm, kindof like what you're doing right now.

[Phenom]

The World War II generation would never have let things get this bad socially

Care to elaborate? Because from what I've gathered about the past, racism, sexism, and basically punishing someone for not being a white christian was the norm. I'm having trouble seeing how things have gotten worse socially.

[Axion004]

Not necessarily new generations but new people. Most people will never contribute any form of intellectual progress to mankind simply because they will never be given the opportunity to do so.

[Odie]

Also the gays. I hear they didn't like the gays.

[PThaPhenom]

Also the gays. I hear they didn't like the gays.

They also were quick to call you a communist if they didn't like your views. The utter irony is no one has really practiced this in it's true form because it takes a whole world instead of a nation to do so. Plus, the idea of communist dictator is quite paradoxical. Hell, it's even humorous. We can call an apple an orange and pick peaches from the pear tree and everyone would agree, "Looks like a pear to me".