It seems like our collective lack of development has a genetic component, but why?

[sholomar]

Quote

But my question is why does nature seemingly limit our spiritual and psychological capacities? Why is Ralston and this teenager the exception and not the rule? And why doesn’t society acknowledge this as even being a problem? America spends more money on alcohol than genetic research every year, this alone highlights our idiocy.

 

It only seems limiting because we are at this point in our genetic and technological development, and not some other time. Humans, especially in the age of social media, lack patience and want everything now.  They also lack the perspective of being able to see things from someone else's point of view, or the view of context on how life used to be experienced in the past, or how it might in the future. We can only experience the "now" and the "now" is what determines our feeling state so that's where we derive a lot of our context on life.

It's like blaming the slave owner in 1800 for owning slaves or blaming the aging boomer for being a racist when those were cultural norms at the time. It's silly to blame people for past actions based on cultural mores at that time, yet people in the here and now do it all the time. You learn from the past, you don't sit and brood over it, or blame people now for the actions of their ancestors and demand reparations. Undeveloped people do this.

Give it another 100 years, or 500.... assuming we don't invent a self aware AI that destroys us before we reach that point.  We are not doing the things you suggest because we haven't reached the right level of development to do so.  Nature is savage if you really observe life on this planet... just saying. Tough pill to swallow by those hipster progressives who talk about nature being "pure and innocent" and mankind being the evil ones... it's actually the opposite. It's mankind trying to play God and re-write the laws of nature to benefit their "morality."

Edited January 4 by sholomar