What are we doing today that future generations will question?
What is acceptable to us as a society that our children will be ashamed of?

Reading Omnivore's Dilemma, this quote has me pondering: "It may be that our moral enlightenment has advanced to the point where the practice of eating animals - like our former practices of keeping slaves or treating women as inferior beings, can now be seen for the barbarity it is, a relic of an ignorant past that very soon will fill us with shame."

The book describes what animal rights activists call our speciesist way of thinking - we have the right, because we are human, to dominate, enslave, and 'murder' animals. It compares this to racism, and suggests that future generations will be horrified by our actions.

So, do you think this will happen? Why or why not? Also, what other things are we doing that will horrify future generations?

This is always a difficult one to answer. I think that there is probable that they'll be a little ashamed of our reluctance to make adjustments in response to environmental problems. I also think that they'll wonder about our failures to intervene to stop recent genocides.

There's a movement at the moment towards giving greater recognition of the abilities and opinions of neurological atypicals. It may be in the future the way such people have been treated in the past is frowned upon in the future.

I think it is important not to fall into the trap of viewing history as progressive. It may be that our children's children revert to the views of our ancestors.

I think another question it might be useful to ask ourselves what are we doing today that many of our ancestors would frown upon and why?

Niall001 wrote:I think it is important not to fall into the trap of viewing history as progressive. It may be that our children's children revert to the views of our ancestors.

It may also turn out that our descendents will be ashamed of some of the very good things we've done. History is quirky like that.

Niall001 wrote:
There's a movement at the moment towards giving greater recognition of the abilities and opinions of neurological atypicals.

Can you please explain this?

Well, briefly, one example would be in the case of autistic people, when educating them we tend to focus on pushing them towards behaving in ways that we find acceptable, but which they find intolerable. It's very much a case of changing the person to fit the system and not the other way around.

It could be compared to the way in which left-handed people were often forced to write with their right hand by teachers and parents in the past.

Here's a related wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologic ... _of_autism

Thanks Niall001 for the explanation and the link. Very interesting idea.

It's very much a case of changing the person to fit the system and not the other way around.

This leads me to think about the RCMP. I've read a few books about the training that RCMP members go through. (Scarlet Tunic and Scarlet Tunic II by Teather)

The training seperates the trainees from their family and friends, gives them no free time for reflection, reading, etc., and begins 'tearing them down' so they can rebuild them as a force - not as an individual. Once they are RCMP members, they are usually furthur isolated by being posted in different towns at regular intervals. Soon it becomes easiest to spend free time with their 'own', other RCMP members.

I've heard it said, but haven't investigated it myself, that the RCMP's practices meet all the definitions of a cult.

Anyhow, to get to my point, RCMP members go in to their training with the goal of saving society from itself, of upholding law and moral order. But through their training and 'culture', they are isolated from that society (or else they only see the very worst of it, the element they deal with in their working life). In fact, they often become an alternate or seperate society themselves.

I haven't read much on military training, but I do assume that it is taught that they are not individuals but are a unit. And they are isolated from non-military society.

Now if we say morality is in some form derived from what is acceptable in society, how do we then judge them by our society's rules? Is it right to judge them at all - or should we judge those that are responsible for creating the society where such atrocities (Abu Ghraib) are accepted?

qwaszxter wrote:What are we doing today that future generations will question? What is acceptable to us as a society that our children will be ashamed of?

Two answers come to mind immediately:

1) War
2) Income inequities: some people are so rich while many are so poor

Of course, those are issues that present-day liberals, such as myself, are ashamed of.

JulianTheApostate wrote:

qwaszxter wrote:What are we doing today that future generations will question? What is acceptable to us as a society that our children will be ashamed of?

Two answers come to mind immediately:

1) War
2) Income inequities: some people are so rich while many are so poor

Of course, those are issues that present-day liberals, such as myself, are ashamed of.

But these are also things we can see as a staple for our entire history! Why would you think that future generations (and what do you consider 'future' in your thinking Julian) would think it any more detestable than we do today?

Mr. P.

I seemed to have gone off topic a bit in my last post - sorry.

Anyhow, back on topic - what are we doing today that future generations will question?

Our food - our choices of what we eat, where we get the food from, and how it is grown/manufactured.

We are a generation that will die of the diseases of affluence - cancer, heart attacks, diabetes - from our food choices.

Our food choices are also harming our environment - pesticides, herbicides, etc.

And finally, our dependancy on other countries for our food supply.

misterpessimistic wrote: But these are also things we can see as a staple for our entire history! Why would you think that future generations (and what do you consider 'future' in your thinking Julian) would think it any more detestable than we do today?

Obviously, nobody can know what future generations will believe. However, if I had to guess something that future generation would question, the most likely possibility would involve an issue that some people question already. I hope future generations agree with my current views, but who kneows?

It's true that war and income inequities have been thousands of years. However, slavery and the belief that some races are superior to others were also around for thousands of years. Initially abolition and racial equality were fringe notions, but today a large fraction of the population believes in them.