OlgamaAlen t1_je0b10y wrote

Survival of the fittest. It was the rule that governed humanity until communism, and then, these 20-something post-modern grievance junkies who call themselves "woke". Funny how humanity has evolved to the point where it has been able to consciously destroy the very heart of evolution/natural selection. I don't think we're done evolving; this species is just too self-righteous to admit it.


OlgamaAlen t1_je05whn wrote

That is something along the lines of not being able to choose the gender you have at birth. Despite the advances in modern technology about changing these kinds of things after the fact, we still are hard-pressed to find any way to change these things at the root. Even if we were able to, a tense moral debate would arise, with human-centrist Transhumanist-types wanting advances like these to be made legal, and deep-ecologist-types like myself arguing that such advances go too far down the road of "playing God". In terms of what you want to call this, you may want to look into Buddhist writings on cause-and-effect, which go into these things quite a bit (intrinsic reality, parabrahman, etc.)


OlgamaAlen t1_je02xsf wrote

You prove a valid point. Some kind of political landscape is intrinsic to any society as complex as ours. Without one, there would be chaos. There are too many decisions needed to be made about too many social issues, many of which don't exist in simpler societies (abortion, human rights, etc.). My little paragraph was simply to hint at the theoretical framework of a future society where the complexity in social structure has been reduced to that which is undoubtedly needed to advance intellectually as a species, instead of materialistically.

In terms of the synthesis of science and religion, I meant that there could be a future when the true nature of death and the soul was realized (so a "spiritual science" would be a reality), but that's a road that leads into a lot of unpopular ideas that I wouldn't want to get into.


OlgamaAlen t1_jdyr4wb wrote

I have realized something: every political party is guaranteed to have flaws. Because in science, there is a path to truth. In spirituality, there is a path to truth. But there is no path to truth in politics because opinions are central to each political ideology rather than fragments of a greater truth. In science, the endpoint at which truth is realized is when a theory is proven, and truth is realized in spirituality upon death or enlightenment, depending on your religion. In this way science and religion are quite similar and a future where the two are synthesized into one field is possible.