Do people give too much of a shit?

[Unwardil]

I don't really know if this is more politics or philosophy, but I'll put it in here anyway.

Why don't we see any Apollo projects anymore? Or massive irrigation projects or any kind of project on that kind of scale, designed to solve a really really colossal objective of some kind and damning the cost. Why is the argument. "Yeah, we probably could go to mars, or solve global warming or whatever the fuck, but then how am I going to afford a 20th ivory back-scratcher?"

Basically, do people give too much of a shit about little, short term things that they simply don't have a large enough battery of giving a shit to care about bigger more long reaching issues. And secondly, is the more... Well, how else to put it, "media-intensive" life style exacerbating this, versus say, the 1960s when you had huge action of the kind I'm talking about with civil rights movements and apollo projects and blah blah blah. Could people care more about that stuff then because they didn't have so much other meaningless garbage to worry about or does that have nothing to do with anything.

Not that I'm condemning technology here, far from it, but more wondering if this is some kind of side effect of other wise good medicine.

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

How DARE you talk bad of my precious computer? HOW DARE YOU? You damn old-school succubus of EVIL!

 

[Unwardil]

Ok then, feel free to to tell me that a) that has nothing to do with it or b) this isn't even a thing and here's why.

 

[Independent Vision]

It's hard to say what is behind it.

Some would say it goes in cycles, much like fashion. Some would say it might be because we've gotten to the point where the "big things" do not impress the general public as much anymore. Some would say it's because we are so comfortable where we are, we're afraid to rock the boat.

If we look at it from a monetary perspective people want quick fixes these days. Quick fixes to all problem and more money to spend on status symbols. We have so many of them now, that we need more money to keep up.

If we look at it from a social perspective we have a whole generation coming up described as the most unoriginal and cynical one. A group of people who wonders "what's the point".

I don't, however, think it is technology's fault, but rather the attitude towards it. How many people really use computers and the internet for it's information, it's many practical uses and the vastness of projects and knowledge that can be obtained and stored through them?
And how many bought this or that computer because it looks good and it's the newest thing on the market?

The problem here is human attitude and the way we work as societies, IMO. The demonstrations used to be, in part, a way to both further ones own viewpoint, meet up with like-minded individuals and alleviate guilt. Now that can all be done through one click of a button for some.

We do also have a problem with information overload and way too much things being run through media outlets which are essentially propaganda machines. It's not the technology but the way we relate to it, utilize it and IF we know how to use it correctly or not.


Wow... what a ramble. Sorry about that.

 

[Case]

So you're saying the Apollo missions were carried out because the public was bored?

That is very, very far fetched.

 

[Prolescum]

Perhaps it's not a case of no longer caring as such and more of a no-one ever cared much at all; Americans didn't care about getting to the moon, they cared about beating the Russians to the moon; they wanted lower taxes but didn't care that in return they'd get crap schools because maybe they'd be able to afford private schooling with all that extra dosh.

Although it's fair to say this doesn't apply to all Americans, the "me me ME" culture predominates there and has ever since the warping of the American dream.

Compare http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Truslow_Adams

that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.

with the rather different interpretation it has today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream#The_four_dreams_of_consumerism

Ownby (1999) identifies four American dreams that the new consumer culture addressed. The first was the "Dream of Abundance," offering a cornucopia of material goods to all Americans, making them proud to be the richest society on earth. The second was the "Dream of a Democracy of Goods," whereby everyone had access to the same products regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, or class, thereby challenging the aristocratic norms of the rest of the world whereby only the rich or well-connected are granted access to luxury. The "Dream of Freedom of Choice," with its ever expanding variety of good allowed people to fashion their own particular life style. Finally, the "Dream of Novelty," in which ever-changing fashions, new models, and unexpected new products broadened the consumer experience in terms of purchasing skills and awareness of the market, and challenged the conservatism of traditional society and culture, and even politics.

Being an outsider, however, one can only speculate.

 

[Welshidiot]

(things that welshidiot agrees with)

We must also consider the effect on feelings and perception when the public are confronted with the realisation that big government projects are actually just political window dressing.
In addition to that the public also has to confront the realisation that corruption, complacency, and incompetence are quite often rife in big developmental/exploratory projects, putting the furtherance of mankind's interests, and indeed human lives themselves at risk, EG:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill


In the face of these factors I find it quite easy to see how public opinion becomes jaded in regard to such exploits.

 

[Andiferous]

I'm only guessing, but I imagine it's pretty expensive to send people into space.

However, keep in mind that it's become part of a business venture these days, with people buying shuttle time in orbit on a seemingly regular basis. Like Richard Branson of Virgin Records, who owns his own commercial space flight corporation. Just in case you didn't click on that link, the index page says: "book your place in space and join over 430 Virgin Galactic astronauts who will venture into space." That's a lot more than in the sixties.

Meanwhile, technology is leaps and bounds from what it was in '69. Nasa doesn't need to send up chimps on dangerous missions anymore. They can send a robot to satelite Mars or Pluto and follow a constant stream of data over the long-term, without worrying about getting it home safely. Computers are much more efficient than humans at collecting data in space. Also, Nasa doesn't have to worry about killing people.

I'd guess it's just less amazing these days.

 

[Leçi]

Humans are conservative animals, they don't like change. They prefer to live their lives with the things they know, they actually don't want to solve problems since it
a) has always been affecting their lives
b) never affected their lives, so they don't care

Only when a problem of colum B goes to colum A they start to do something about it to stop it. Otherwise the general public doesn't care.

According to me anyway.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

Hey man,

When they take the universe away from you, you must bring it toward you. That's why I went out and purchased a new telescope.



I have only used it once and I like the results so far and that was under a nearly full moon.