Society & Lifestyle >
Political Values
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedIs the world getting better or worse with each generation?
Results so far:
| Better | 48% | 23 votes | Total: 48 votes | |
| Worse | 52% | 25 votes |
Better
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThe nostalgic assault on modernity is the most irrational application of thought that exists in societies. Nostalgic dreams corrupt people's minds and allow them to think that life was radically better in the past and seek to reclaim it. Dreamers of the past then make desperate attempts to maintain the past by imposing oppressive forces on all aspects of society and hinder the next generations from living to their full potential and attainting progress for the future. It's a classic case of the grass being greener on the other side, and yet the vast majority of people will still condemn the progression of time because of their attachment to the idea of a golden age sometime in the past.
The first and most obvious logical fallacy of claiming that generations are getting worse is that every single generation that has existed, has claimed that the world is getting worse. Take that back to the beginning of humankind, and where is our race? In caves? People are people. They always will be people, with the same tendencies and motivations. Logically, the next generation is a result of the one prior to it. If the one prior to it was great, it wouldn't have resulted in a bad generation, unless you wish to suggest that there's something inherent in the human experience that drives every new generation to be worse than their parents. You have to step aside and realize that it's circular logic to think about a past generation that degenerates into this generation. There's no solution if that's the thought process you wish to assert.
Expressing the same, nostalgic feelings that the world has become such a nasty place with entrance of the new generation is so prevalent in every modern culture. And there are very basic reasons why so many people feel this way. A lot of it has to do with attachment to a generations religious, moral, and societal dogmas which cloud reasoning, and allows the holder to believe that a world under their generations same ideology would manifest itself into a better place. Clearly, looking at the past's record of morality, with its widespread extreme inequality, it would be very difficult to holistically and honestly approach history such an ideology.
A lot of it has to do with how the human brain processes and stores memories as well. Obviously, people don't think of the past the same way as they do the present or future. The present is full of hundreds of emotions at once, including all of its stresses, responsibilities, and joys and agonizes. Thinking about the past is drastically different. You don't remember all of the sufferings of everyday life, the minor snubs and insults others direct at you, and you don't remember how it felt as whole. Memories are extracted parts of a whole.
You remember small snippets of a day, and mostly you remember the positive over negative. You don't have to, and can't live out a single moment of the present, but that's how remembering the past works. If the present was like that, sure it'd be great! For example, if your car broke down, you wouldn't have to think about where the money is going to come from, how you're going to get to work while its being repaired, and how you're going to drive your children to school. Instead, you just remember the happy memory of how your friendly neighbor helped you out.
People allow their fond memories of the past to get away from them. Instead of thinking of the past as a whole, they think of it just as the wonderful parts they remember, not the truth as a whole. There's nothing wrong with having fond memories and experiencing the joys of remembering and reliving the past. But when people start approaching their problems in the present by reverting to the past for solutions, it becomes harmful and counterproductive. Trying the same solutions that didn't work to sustain the future in the past is dangerous. What didn't work then isn't going to work now, and you must think rationally and holistically about the past, present, and future.
Fear of the future is another driver behind nostalgic dogma. The cravings for happiness and a stable world is why people readily accept the idea that the past was a better place. Discontent and suffering will always exist, and people will always look for structures and ideas that promise a way out of the present. But looking to the past isn't going to get you their. People weren't somehow smarter, nicer, more respectful, more refined, more honest, more beautiful and less dangerous in the past, or whatever else nostalgic boosters claim them to be. These are people who think the 50's where exactly like Leave it to Beaver. It's absurd to even think that the world was a happier and better place in the past.
For anyone claiming that the past world was so much better than it is now, you have to wonder, exactly what period are they talking about? Up to the 1960's, racism and sexism were not only rampantly ideologically supported; they were legally structured and enforced vehemently. Sure, the past was properly pretty great if you were white with a significant income. And it's strange how lightly nostalgic boosters take this fact, like it's something that can easily be discarded from discussion. The only reason they are able to do so, is because of the newer generations. If everyone held the mindset, that so many do, that the world was a better place in the past, progress against racism and sexism would never have been made! It's absolutely puzzling that a non-white or woman can claim without second thoughts that the world was a better place in the past. If you take an honest and holistic look at the past, it is undeniable that the world was a much worse place for everyone except well off white males. And these problems still aren't fixed today. Racism and sexism are still ever present even now, and the people to look towards to help fix these problems are the next generation.
Embracing progress with open arms for a better tomorrow is the best solution humankind has to all of its problems, not nostalgic dogma rooted in irrational dreams.
Learn more about this author, Michelle R. Bishop.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Worse
In my opinion times are changing for the worse, and are getting worse with every generation. Having been born in 1991, I am of a fairly recent generation, and yet I still believe the world is going downhill. However, as I am rational and objective in all my data, I also know that it is mostly a matter of my opinion that I think in this fashion, as I know that change is necessary for society to maintain itself.
Change is something one must accept, if not tolerate, as part of a context operating by the rules of evolution. Our universe, being of the Newtonian action-reaction variety, is one large ever changing and ever evolving mass. As such our society, being composed of part of this universe, operates by the same system of evolution, and change is both neccessary and beneficial to it on the whole.
So why do I argue that society is going downhill? Well I never said I liked living in a scientific Newtonian universe, now did I? Just because something is an accepted fact does not make it a good thing. Pain, unfairness, etc are all accepted facts, but that does not make them good, however much the hippies, naturalists and environmentalists will argue that everything should be savage and uncivilized.
In my opinion recent society can be loosely classified into various periods, as well as different nations and demographics within them. Thus the various cultures, and thus the various ways and lifestyles, morals and norms, of society, can be classified rather vaguely and by no means precisely. I could not give an exact date, nor even a rough estimate, for the point at which society reached its apex of development and progress, as it differs between nations and demographics contained therein. I will thus use the recent history of the three main English speaking nations, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and Australia, for my argument.
These three nations, despite many differences between them, along with Canada and New Zealand and to some extent several European countries and their dominions, constitute what I define as the nations of normalcy. Lets not bother to define normalcy as that would take up an entire series of rather heavy books, but suffice it to say that when you say 'times used to be better' you are referring to the past in the nations of normalcy, and not to the recent past in, say, Kenya, or Japan.
As such one can loosely define the period 1850-1960 as the old normalcy, and the period 1960-2000 as the new normalcy. This is of course a gross generalization and simplification, but suffice it to say that during these two periods (separated only because one can roughly trace the decline of normalcy to the teenage revolution of the 1950s and the hippie and other movements of the 1960s) times were 'normal'.
In my opinion the old normalcy had many problems, such as inequality to the poorer classes, women, and children. It was also a time of less high living standards for many, and a less technologically developed time, although the superiority of modern technology over that of the past is debatable and largely a matter of opinion. The only area this would not be so would be in regards to anasthesia and other medical advancements, where pain was more common at say the dentist.
However rather than fixing the cracks in this pot of the old normalcy, the hippies and similar movements smashed it to pieces. Fixing what was not broke and breaking what was perfectly fine, they in pretty much all areas caused a regression. Up until this time the old normalcy had been in many areas progressing, though not in some, and it is to be lamented that the hippies and similar movements destroyed what was largely an effective and working system.
The decline of manners, the use of proper grammar, etc is largely nonexistent, as even in the old normalcy there were street hoodlums, divorces, rape, violence and rebellions of all sorts. But there was to some extent a cultural system of norms and values, that, if not strictly obeyed, at least existed in theory as unwritten and partly written law.
Many things changed for the worse in my opinion, but only an idealist would look back fondly on the old normalcy, wiping a tear from his cheek and saluting the flag of his nation. The old normalcy, like all things in this universe, is scientific and largely imperfect, and never perfect or near perfect. It had many problems and to worship it is old fashioned and irrational. But there were ideals and values held then that if not obeyed were still existent and in many areas even effective.
Many areas of life changed with the social movements of the 1960s, which caused much mayhem and change (in my opinion nearly all for the worse) to the old normalcy. The new normalcy could be thought of as the decline of Rome, and this decade its inevitable sacking. The old normalcy could be likened to the classical days of the empire and the old republic. There were still, and are still in limited amounts, vestiges of the old ways and norms, but they are now almost extinct, and replaced by a very decadent, disgraceful and largely backwards system which in my opinion is a regression, not a progression.
Learn more about this author, Mark Waybill.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Political Values
- Should the government dictate what is written in school history books?
- Do you trust federal bureaucrat regulators in Washington to tell you how to live your life?
- Should Native American continue to receive Federal Aid?
- Could a smoking ban affect your housing choices?
- Does pornography cause rape?
