Humanity Man! Yes, yes I am listening to Pink Floyd.

As I was sitting in class today, and began casually wondering about whether or not humans will evolve further, and assuming they do, what could be predicted about the future of my species?  Let me just say first of all, I really don't have a lot of hope for us.  Maybe I'm being far too pessimistic, maybe its the music I'm listening to right now but I don't think our species, maybe even the planet, will survive with the invention of nuclear weapons, which in my opinion leave the world very volatile.  I love the well known Einstein quote"I know not with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones," And that's assuming sticks and stones are left. (But then again, do I really care.  Do I only have support for my species survival/revival? Or would I hope that any sentient creature could carry on learning?)

         

 But putting all this aside, and assuming we don't blow ourselves up or get wiped out any time soon, is there a future for our species?  A quick google search brought me to what looks like an interesting website.  I haven't explored much, but I did find one article I quite enjoyed.
http://www.humansfuture.org/future_the_future_of_homo_sapiens.php.htm  

 While I was reading the article, I began wondering about whether or not a new, more evolved                  humanoid could evolve from us, or (somehow) emerge, and what this would mean for our future.  The article mentions this briefly under "How A New Species Can Replace Homo Sapiens", specifically through positive gene alteration.  If this could happen, I wonder where the line would be drawn to referring to a creature as a "human" or "person".  At what point would we know that the emerging animals are no longer humans.  I suppose once they are no longer of the species homo sapien sapien.  But is it really our species that defines who we are.  I would initially think of course, but say we come about some very similar creatures to us (through an alien visit, evolution, or whatever), do we call them human? Is it our physical bodies that makes us human? The way our mind works?  What if some new creature has a mind that works almost identical to ours, but they exist in the body of, say, a giraffe, or some bizarre unknown form.  Is it a human?  I don't think it would be a giraffe. Is it something else? It begs the familiar question of what makes a person a person.  I believe science (though admittedly I am not particularly versed on the subject) says that we are separate from apes and other animals because we are "sentient", which basically means to have emotions, be intelligent and conscious.

Moving forward, how do we even know if a knew human style hypothetical species would even consider us sentient?  Maybe they are unbelievably more advanced emotionally, technologically and intelligence wise, and we are as simple dumb sheep to them?  A bit unnerving to think about, no?  Could we ever become a farmed animal?  I'm not talking about a holocaust/genocide situation here, rather literally our entire race become subservient to some new creature, who might even look exactly like us, who might have been created by us! (Am I sounding to nutty at this point? Sorry.) I don't think we know for certain that it's impossible, and that's enough to make me at least slightly nervous, even though there's basically no chance of such an event happening in my lifetime.

 
Then I began pondering whether all of existence as we know it, possibly back to the big bang, is just a simulation in some other being's laboratory. It seems unlikely, but as far as I am concerned, it's impossible to know. I believe in the power of our science, but we don't know what it's limits are, even if we think we do.  As a side not, if it sounds like I'm making a case for god, I'm not. Trust me. Never. I'm simply saying to my knowledge (and perhaps every human's knowledge for the rest of our existence) we can't rule out that we are not simply an experiment, maybe even an amusing past-time, like an ant farm for some order of alien race.  Does that make me a deist?  I don't think so, because I don't believe it's ruled out, or that it necessarily can ever be.  So I suppose that makes me an agnostic...towards deism...yeah.

I'm sorry if this sounds pretty scatterbrained and isn't really very orderly at the moment.  I never feel like organizing thought when I'm excited.  I may edit this for clarity and add more content.  Also, sorry for the sort of wonky formatting.  I did my best.
Happy thinking!

Shall I move away from philosophy?

Thus far in the history of my blog, I have exclusively posted my musing about existential, philosophical stuff, which is all good fun.  But as a result, I don't have a whole lot to post or very often (evidenced by the fact that my last post was what, four months ago?  So, I have decided that from now on, in the interest of having any respectable amount of content, and garnering a few more readers, to make my blogging more casual, and hopefully more frequent.  Not that I won't any philosophical musing I might have, I will simply try to have a range of posts in between them. About what these post will be about, you will find out with me.
 
Also, I have changed the name of the blog to Omnicog, because I like the sound of it, and it means "every thought" in Latin.  Also, I learned thanks to the website below that "the blog called Omnicog" has the anagram "bold, technological gem."  How great is that?
http://www.deanjackson.dj/nameanagram/

On the Purpose of Human Life

I've been thinking lately about whether or not people should have a purpose during their time lived on Earth.  Is there a reason for our lives, should we be serving some higher purpose?  My recent thoughts have been that, seeing as humans are scientifically just another animal species, we should be content with trying to make our short days on Earth as positive as we can.  So the meaning of life? I don;t believe that there is a meaning to life, besides to live it, and try and make it as good for you as you can.

I always run into a mental block, however, when I try to practically apply my thinking.  If life is purposeless, then why is there justice?  Well maybe that is because this allows everyone to have a more equal chance to live their life the best that they can.  But why do we then care about our legacy?  If life has no purpose, then why should people think anything about me after I die, and also, why do I care what they will think.  I'll admit, I do care in some amount how people remember me after I die.  I would certainly prefer that the people whom I respect think highly of me after I'm gone.  But my logic tells me that absolutely nothing should matter to me after I'm gone, since I will not know what is happening, or be able to care.  But for some reason, I do care, now, in the living. For example, it bothers me now to worry that my family may choose to put a cross up as my gravestone, in the event of my death.  Caring about what people think of me now makes some sense, as I think it is part of human nature to socially accepted, but after I'm gone, why? Maybe it's just a mystery of the human mind that is impossible to explain.

Even if life may not have a purpose, that does not mean we should not work to do good in it, for ourselves, and even for others,

On Friendship

Why does man hold what we call "friends"? (1)Is it because being around someone with similar views to yours raises your self-esteem? (2) Is it because social recognition and acceptance is an important facet of being human? (3) Is it because exposing yourself to others and their views and opinions serves to enhance your understanding? (4) Is it for the benefit you receive for having someone who wishes the best for you and is willing to assist you?

Of course, we hold friends for all these reasons and more.

(1) We as humans naturally flock to people who have similar thoughts and opinions to us.  This is a natural thing, because by spending time with people we respect and agree with, there will be a lighter atmosphere and more can be accomplished.

On the other hand, spending time with people we disagree with can often lead to strife, disagreements, and awkward moments.  Why then do most of us have at least one friend that has differing views from our own? I think the most likely explanation for this is that the other factors of friendship can overpower differing views.  Furthermore, there can be a positive side.  By spending time with people we trust and respect, but who have different views than ours, it will be easier to understand those opinions, and possibly even incorporate some of their tenets, thereby expanding our scope.

The reason we spend time with people we agree with is so that they will support our thoughts and ideas, and make us feel better about ourselves.  Also, we support our friends, so there exists a happy reciprocity.

(2) Almost all of us feel it, and in fact it can lead to problems, in particular for the younger generations.  The desire/need to be socially recognized and accepted.

For most humans, an aspect of our personality is to spread our influence amongst society.  I find it similar in a way how animals have the need to spread their genealogical traits amongst the species, but instead of physical characteristics, we have the desire to spread the things of our own creation, and other things that we think other people should know about.

This desire to be known and respected is an impetus to make friends.  When we have friends and acquaintances, we can spread our social influence better.

(3)  By having friends, we have a confidant that we can bounce ideas off of, and gain more understanding.  By combining ideas, we can reach better ideas with more influence and power, and more possibility for personal gain.  Also, just hearing your friends ideas, and having them share their knowledge with you can make you a smarter, more well-rounded person.

Friends serve another purpose by providing a way to check if your ideas are rational or not.  Having a friend tell you a flaw in your thinking can be less hurtful than having a large group of peers sneer at you.

(4) A friend is someone who wished the best for you, and help you out when you are in need of assistance. For this reason, the more friends you have, the better. Maybe even better than having a plethora of friends is having a couple of very close friends, who are like family to you.  These people you can hold near and dear to yourself your entire life, and they will be there to guide you, and to help you to be successful.  And you will do the same.

Now, to quickly expand on this quote I put in this post.  There has to be reciprocity in a friendship. A friendship where only one person is benefiting if doomed to either fail, or to a fate of nothing more than casual acquaintanceship.   By being a friendly person, more people will be drawn to you, and you will have more opportunities for friendships.  You also need to be a good friend to the friends you have, or, first of all, you will lose those friends, and second of all, you will decrease chanced for future friends.

Where good ideas come from (video)

This is an interesting video about connectivity and breakthroughs.  I agree with his thoughts about how the internet will foster better creativity through more consumption of information and thoughts.

On Media Bias and Celebtrities

There's always someone famous in the news because of some scandal.  Recently, it's been people like
Brittany Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Mel Gibson, and Charlie Sheen.  The media can earn lots of money on these "Guess what s/he he did now" stories.  I'm not going pretend like I don't enjoy hearing about these people's escapades; it's fun to see how they live, be flabbergasted at their behavior, or admire their unabashed courage.

What I don't find appropriate is when the media passes judgement on those people's action.  Sure, you may find it bizarre the way Mr. Sheen acts, and that he has two girlfriend, but it is not the media's job to tell us what to think of him.  I enjoy them reporting about the celebrities, and most of the interviews (when they are unbiased), but I don't want them to tell me what to think of him.  Of course, it is a different story when they commit a crime.

That's just my personal opinion of how a good, legitimate news source should behave though, of course they have done nothing wrong.

There's nothing wrong with a news source having a "left or right swing" to it, but they shouldn't pretend to be fair if they do.  Another thing that bothers me, regarding media bias, is when a biased news source attacks another news source by claiming they are biased.

In my opinion, however,  the job of the media is to present information to the masses, and have them interpret it the they will.

So basically, I just want the media to be what they claim to be.  If they are going to be biased, theres's nothing wrong with that, but they shouldn't be hypocritical and claim that they aren't.  If their target audience is a certain political party, then they should admit it, not claim to be unbiased and attack another source for their bias towards another party.

On Environmentalism

Quite prevalent in society today is the "green movement", which is people wanting to be environmentally friendly.  I don't have a problem with conservation, I really don't.  I enjoy nature as much as the next man, and I think National parks and other places set aside for conservation are a fine idea.  I think preserving Natural Beauty is a good thing to do.  Also, protecting other species is just fine.

However, I think todays society is taking this "eco" stuff too far.  Fine, I'll recycle, but don't freak out it I put some paper in a trash can.  And please, stop saying that wasting papers is destroying natural habitats, because it's simply not true.  Trees are a crop, which are grown on farms.  Complaining about a few papers thrown out instead of recycled is even more ridiculous than berating someone for eating corn.  It's a crop, we can always grow more, we're not hurting anyone, what's the problem?

Pollution is a slightly more serious issue.  Yes, it can be a problem in big cities, and yes, it would be a better idea to use renewable energy.  I would support a shift towards better energy options, but it is insane to hear people saying burning coal should be outlawed, or that we should attempt to immediately and completely switch to solar/wind power.

Seeing "eco-friendly" on every dang product is kinda getting on my nerves.  It's just a marketing attempt, which is fine, it's just annoying as it seems to be popping up one everything for stupid reasons.  For example, the keyboard I am typing on (a great Logitech solar keyboard, which I love) tried to brand itself as being "green, on it's packaging.  It says it is eco-frinendly because is has a "fully recyclable box".  Last I checked, pretty much all cardboard is recyclable. This type of marketing campaign seems to be hoping people read things quickly and only look at the pretty nature scenes. (Recycled, or recyclable.  There's a difference, but they look similar.) There's really no reason why this should bother me, it's just a pet peeve of mine.

Some ridiculous green claims