Do we fear having our problems solved?

[Jannes]

Do we fear having societies problems solved? Like it is quite possible to solve societies survival problems in environmental causes, inequality, ... It will take time but it's very possible to solve most survival problems. (except dying after a healthy life ofc.) Maybe society knows that and at least partially creates new drama so that it never faces the situation of being problem free. Because that might be terrifying. 

I can only speak of personal inquiries and having no problems seems terrifying. 

So if that is the case, is it maybe necessary to integrate a vision of what we do when most problems are solved? A new kind of drama? Just so that we actually want to solve societies problems.

[Schizophonia]

No, it's not easy.

For exemple the environmental causes : How to reduce the fossil energy without impacting people's life by knowing that alternatives are way more expensive, and by extension that we are in an inflation period where a big part if not most of people have actually already difficulties to feed themselves ? 

Please enlighten me. 

Edited May 25 by Schizophonia

[Princess Arabia]

No one really wants their problems solved because that would mean the end of the individual. The individual thrives on problems, that's how it constructs, maintains and sustains itself. Same for society, just different set of problems. We're never problem free. Thoughts created the problem and were trying to solve the problem with more thoughts. Endless loop.

[Nivsch]

Problems are created by us in order to show the next step to a more united collective or self. Therefore this is really not about the very occurance of a problem, but about how we relate to it, what determines if we are in a better or worse place. There is no such a thing even not in theory a problem free state.

Edited May 25 by Nivsch

[Nilsi]

3 hours ago, Jannes said:

Do we fear having societies problems solved? Like it is quite possible to solve societies survival problems in environmental causes, inequality, ... It will take time but it's very possible to solve most survival problems. (except dying after a healthy life ofc.) Maybe society knows that and at least partially creates new drama so that it never faces the situation of being problem free. Because that might be terrifying. 

I can only speak of personal inquiries and having no problems seems terrifying. 

So if that is the case, is it maybe necessary to integrate a vision of what we do when most problems are solved? A new kind of drama? Just so that we actually want to solve societies problems.

any complex self-organizing system (like society and life at large) can only exist against a background of chaos.

for example, humans (and by extension society) couldn't have evolved if it weren't for the intrinsic survival challenges that bipedal ape-like species were facing.

complexity is literally the product of the process of solving and adapting to existential problems.

Edited May 25 by Nilsi

[Jannes]

3 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

No, it's not easy.

For exemple the environmental causes : How to reduce the fossil energy without impacting people's life by knowing that alternatives are way more expensive, and by extension that we are in an inflation period where a big part if not most of people have actually already difficulties to feed themselves ? 

Please enlighten me. 

Much comes from the stage orange mindset. If wealth contribution was more equal, if people lowered their living standards to the necessary, If cooperations tried to maximize their contribution instead of their income (throwing food away or building low quality products which will fall apart at some point on purpose), if more people would be more evolved and wouldnt do jobs which have no benefit on society (trading for example), if their would be less resource loss in conflict (wars), in short if we all were less selfish we would have plenty of resources to make a good living for everyone on earth I believe. People might just lack the vision how such a society could be like so they dont evolve towards making it happen. 

 

[Basman]

Society doesn't work like that. An individual might but society is too big and complex for that to be the case.What you could define as problems are the effects of how we survive as a society.

The solution to these problems are never "easy". It is not easy to switch away from fossil fuel because there are no current viable alternatives that meet our needs. Pollution is a necessary consequence of our dependence on fossil fuel. Even when we have alternatives, that requires shifts in how we think and conduct ourselves. Wars had to be fought to eradicate slavery or install democracy for example.

3 minutes ago, Jannes said:

Much comes from the stage orange mindset. If wealth contribution was more equal, if people lowered their living standards to the necessary, If cooperations tried to maximize their contribution instead of their income (throwing food away or building low quality products which will fall apart at some point on purpose), if more people would be more evolved and wouldnt do jobs which have no benefit on society (trading for example), if their would be less resource loss in conflict (wars), in short if we all were less selfish we would have plenty of resources to make a good living for everyone on earth I believe. People might just lack the vision how such a society could be like so they dont evolve towards making it happen.

Giving up on selfishness can be one of the hardest things to do if your selfishness benefits you. People often have to suffer to grow spiritually.

[Jannes]

26 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

any complex self-organizing system (like society and life at large) can only exist against a background of chaos.

for example, humans (and by extension society) couldn't have evolved if it weren't for the intrinsic survival challenges that bipedal ape-like species were facing.

complexity is literally the product of the process of solving and adapting to existential problems.

Okay so if a complex-organizing system successfully overcomes all of its crude survival challenges, what does it do then?

[Schizophonia]

11 minutes ago, Jannes said:

Much comes from the stage orange mindset. If wealth contribution was more equal, if people lowered their living standards to the necessary, If cooperations tried to maximize their contribution instead of their income (throwing food away or building low quality products which will fall apart at some point on purpose), if more people would be more evolved and wouldnt do jobs which have no benefit on society (trading for example), if their would be less resource loss in conflict (wars), in short if we all were less selfish we would have plenty of resources to make a good living for everyone on earth I believe. People might just lack the vision how such a society could be like so they dont evolve towards making it happen. 

 

No offense but it looks like a fuzzy point of view who come from your imagination. 

Edited May 25 by Schizophonia

[Nilsi]

4 minutes ago, Jannes said:

Okay so if a complex-organizing system successfully overcomes all of its crude survival challenges, what does it do then?

it doesn't, because its existence is contingent on these survival challenges.

it evolves forever, which isn't to imply some teleology; it could also devolve, depending on who or what defines these terms. but it always self-organizes, i.e., it is alive.

[Jannes]

7 minutes ago, Basman said:

Society doesn't work like that. An individual might but society is too big and complex for that to be the case.What you could define as problems are the effects of how we survive as a society.

The solution to these problems are never "easy". It is not easy to switch away from fossil fuel because there are no current viable alternatives that meet our needs. Pollution is a necessary consequence of our dependence on fossil fuel. Even when we have alternatives, that requires shifts in how we think and conduct ourselves. Wars had to be fought to eradicate slavery or install democracy for example.

Giving up on selfishness can be one of the hardest things to do if your selfishness benefits you. People often have to suffer to grow spiritually.

True. I dont mean that these problems are easily solved but that we potentially could solve them. Thats very different from very other species on earth and completely against our paradigm of thinking. 

[Jannes]

11 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

No offense but it looks like a fuzzy point of view who come from your imagination. 

Please elaborate, I cant work with that. 

[Jannes]

7 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

it doesn't, because its existence is contingent on these survival challenges.

it evolves forever, which isn't to imply some teleology; it could also devolve, depending on who or what defines these terms. but it always self-organizes, i.e., it is alive.

Yesss beautifully said. But in the context of humanity for example we really could solve all our basic survival needs. And at that point we could evolve into something different. We could either go on a fly to mars and do basically the same thing or we could consciously create our own problems, maybe in the form of play. 

[Schizophonia]

3 minutes ago, Jannes said:

Please elaborate, I cant work with that. 

I meant, you have assumed that "fix most of the main problems on the modern world would be actually easy" and explain your pov with some basic assumptions. 

 

[Jannes]

Just now, Schizophonia said:

I meant, you have assumed that "fix most of the main problems on the modern world would be actually easy" and explain your pov with some basic assumptions. 

No I said it's possible and it would take time. 

[Jannes]

This is weird. I am so convinced in my own idea but nobody seems to follow. Perhaps I didn't explain enough or maybe the idea just isnt that good. I often overhype my own ideas for the day. 

[Nilsi]

23 minutes ago, Jannes said:

This is weird. I am so convinced in my own idea but nobody seems to follow. Perhaps I didn't explain enough or maybe the idea just isnt that good. I often overhype my own ideas for the day. 

you make a good argument, which is essentially a classic freudian argument about death drive and repetition compulsion, but it's an incomplete view without a complex systems lens, and i'm quite critical of such overextensions of psychoanalytic theory.

Edited May 25 by Nilsi

[Jannes]

38 minutes ago, Nilsi said:

you make a good argument, which is essentially a classic freudian argument about death drive and repetition compulsion, but it's an incomplete view without a complex systems lens, and i'm quite critical of such overextensions of psychoanalytic theory.

Thanks! You point out a big weakness in my reasoning. I haven't acquired nearly enough knowledge to see society through a complex systems thinking lens so I guess this idea needs to stay in work.