Heaven On Earth ...

[Alice]

I've been thinking about the following things and they have sort of converged in my head to become related although they started out separate ...

 

I followed a link given by Futurekid to the site 'Why doesn't God heal amputee's'.

 

http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/god32.htm

 

It is a great read ... towards the end it raises the idea of working towards creating 'heaven on earth' ourselves using our skills/talents/ingenuity/compassion to strive towards this goal.

 

Now what?

 

The question that we should be asking ourselves is simple: What is our goal as a species? We are, potentially, the only intelligent species in the entire universe. What are we going to do with our existence?

 

Have you ever considered it? Have you ever thought about the goals of the human race?

 

Heaven on earth

 

I would like to make a suggestion. Here is one thing that I believe we should be doing with our existence: we should create Heaven on EarthTM for every human being on the planet.

 

That's right: Heaven on EarthTM. Since God is imaginary, there is no "afterlife" and no "heaven" in the religious sense. Therefore, we should begin to build Heaven on Earth.

 

Why is this important? Because right now, for a majority of people on this planet, what we have created is Hell on Earth.

 

This linked in my head with a question from SAA about whether or not we think mankind is getting better or not ...

 

 

I want to bring up evolution of humans in regards to humanity...don't you all believe it's gotten worse and not better?

 

and my own thoughts about how tiresome heaven sounds to me .... and a comment in the Matrix about how they had to scrap their 'everythings dandy' programme and revert back to a period in history where there was a level of struggle for mankind, or else humans just 'gave up' ...

 

(so I have a messy mind ) all of which resulted in me wondering ....

 

1. Do you think mankind is improving?

2. Do you think there will come a time when we can usher in a 'heaven on earth' existence.

3. and if so - will this be all its cracked up to be?

[♦ ficino ♦]

I've been thinking about the following things and they have sort of converged in my head to become related although they started out separate ...

 

I followed a link given by Futurekid to the site 'Why doesn't God heal amputee's'.

 

http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/god32.htm

 

It is a great read ... towards the end it raises the idea of working towards creating 'heaven on earth' ourselves using our skills/talents/ingenuity/compassion to strive towards this goal.

 

Now what?

 

The question that we should be asking ourselves is simple: What is our goal as a species? We are, potentially, the only intelligent species in the entire universe. What are we going to do with our existence?

 

Have you ever considered it? Have you ever thought about the goals of the human race?

 

Heaven on earth

 

I would like to make a suggestion. Here is one thing that I believe we should be doing with our existence: we should create Heaven on EarthTM for every human being on the planet.

 

That's right: Heaven on EarthTM. Since God is imaginary, there is no "afterlife" and no "heaven" in the religious sense. Therefore, we should begin to build Heaven on Earth.

 

Why is this important? Because right now, for a majority of people on this planet, what we have created is Hell on Earth.

 

This linked in my head with a question from SAA about whether or not we think mankind is getting better or not ...

 

 

I want to bring up evolution of humans in regards to humanity...don't you all believe it's gotten worse and not better?

 

and my own thoughts about how tiresome heaven sounds to me .... and a comment in the Matrix about how they had to scrap their 'everythings dandy' programme and revert back to a period in history where there was a level of struggle for mankind, or else humans just 'gave up' ...

 

(so I have a messy mind ) all of which resulted in me wondering ....

 

1. Do you think mankind is improving?

2. Do you think there will come a time when we can usher in a 'heaven on earth' existence.

3. and if so - will this be all its cracked up to be?

 

Hi, Alice. My answers are:

1. no

2. no

3. no

 

sorry. sigh

[Alice]

 

Hi, Alice. My answers are:

1. no

2. no

3. no

 

sorry. sigh

 

*sigh* ~ thank you. It would be good to hear your reasoning for arriving at these conclusions. I guess there are days and situations where brevity is a good thing - but in a discussion I miss the richness that comes from an exchange of views.

[Lizard]

A few thoughts...

First, this is an absolutist statement, and I have difficulty with absolutism:

That's right: Heaven on EarthTM. Since God is imaginary, there is no "afterlife" and no "heaven" in the religious sense. Therefore, we should begin to build Heaven on Earth.

 

We cannot know that we know that there is something or nothing..

 

What is our responsibility to "humankind"? I can be altruistic with the best of them..but how does one go about "building heaven on Earth?" I don't think that's even a possibility at this point in time. People are too diverse to even begin to identify what that would be.

 

My idea of "heaven on earth" is most likely different from yours. In my own house, we have two tv's because we can't even decide on programming

 

I guess I'm taking the questions out of order..

Humankind takes forward steps..and backward steps. Its all part of the evolutionary/learning process. I don't think its "better" or "worse" than before (before what,though?)

 

We are better off than we were during the Dark Ages, when science was based solely on the bible and any thoughts outside of that were frowned upon and often ended with imprisonment...or death.

Of course, there are still places with that sort of attitude..free thought is not world wide.

 

I guess the notion of "heaven" for me, implies someone in charge. I can't quite wrap my brain around that concept as being good.

 

The day will come when humankind will be liberated and free thought will be allowed worldwide. I really feel that it is inevitable.

 

I'm not sure if I've answered your questions or not..

[Alice]

I'm not that keen on absolutist statements either ..

 

Howabout ... whether there is an afterlife or not - is it possible to usher in an era of 'heaven one earth? instead ...

 

 

My idea of "heaven on earth" is most likely different from yours. In my own house, we have two tv's because we can't even decide on programming

 

I agree with you on this one - I think this is one of the reasons why it is so difficult to 'measure' the progress of mankind. The site I linked to makes a number of suggestions for 'heaven on earth' that sound pretty hellish to me (Like harsh punishments for bad people - which raises my liberal gander and makes me cry 'how bad/who decides and why'!

 

 

Humankind takes forward steps..and backward steps. Its all part of the evolutionary/learning process. I don't think its "better" or "worse" than before (before what,though?)

 

I agree with this too - so often how we see our 'condition' relative to the past is entirely one of perspective.

 

I guess the notion of "heaven" for me, implies someone in charge. I can't quite wrap my brain around that concept as being good.

 

The thing I find it hard to wrap my mind around is the notion of everything be 'sorted' in heaven. Ho hum - whats to do now then, becomes my trouble. I like the process of sorting and getting sorted. I believe in the 'rightness' of the end goals I'm working towards - but the 'end of the journey' fills me with this weird and not that nice a feeling.

[Cat]

Hi Alice!

This is all very new to me still, but I think I'd give "no" to the questions to, except perhaps the first one. It's not that I think we are improving, more that I think we are changing with time, and differently in different parts of the world, sometimes going forward, sometimes back. I don't think heaven on earth is ever going to be a possibility and to aim for it will only bring disappointment. I think both Animal Farm and Lord of the Flies illustrate the failure seen in that respect in real life situations such as communist USSR. But a "good enough" life, one that is not hell, for as many as we can is more realistic and if and how we participate in that, I guess, is up to the individual. Because it benefits the majority, it is more likely to be accepted and agreed and supported. What is important, perhaps, is that people are not allowed to hinder others progress by imposing their values and ways of life (such as Theocracies) onto them.

I have no idea if that will make any sense, but it's what came into my head when I read your post...

Cat

[Alice]

Hi Alice!

This is all very new to me still, but I think I'd give "no" to the questions to, except perhaps the first one. It's not that I think we are improving, more that I think we are changing with time, and differently in different parts of the world, sometimes going forward, sometimes back. I don't think heaven on earth is ever going to be a possibility and to aim for it will only bring disappointment. I think both Animal Farm and Lord of the Flies illustrate the failure seen in that respect in real life situations such as communist USSR. But a "good enough" life, one that is not hell, for as many as we can is more realistic and if and how we participate in that, I guess, is up to the individual. Because it benefits the majority, it is more likely to be accepted and agreed and supported. What is important, perhaps, is that people are not allowed to hinder others progress by imposing their values and ways of life (such as Theocracies) onto them.

I have no idea if that will make any sense, but it's what came into my head when I read your post...

Cat

 

I think in some ways where I am coming from on this - is that as an ex-christian I now feel much more engaged in the process of alleviating sufferng than I did as a christian.

 

Like I think I paid a lot of lip service to 'making the world a better place' - and I wasted a lot of time waiting around for God to 'open doors' for me ... Now as an ex-christian, its more - 'if its possible to alleviate suffering, I have to get on with it, no sitting on the side lines, its time to roll up my sleeves and get out there and make a difference'

 

The nagging voice of disillusionment says on the one hand (1) the task is too big and mankind keeps messing up too much and on the other (2) and if we sort out all the worlds problems - then what?

[Cat]

Perhaps it's about sorting out your own corner of the world. The "good enough" concept comes form Donald Winnocot, a psychotherapist, who spoke about how mothers don't have to be perfect, just "good enough" for their children to achieve their full potential. Mothers cannot achieve perfection but as long as they fulfil the important needs, that's all the child needs. In the same way, if where ever you find yourself you do what you can, are able to and want to, that's good enough too. If there's something big you feel called to do, do it, otherwise, just do what is in front of you. We may not get the world perfect, but we can try to get our bit of it "good enough" by being "good enough" ourselves.

If we want, that is.

And I hate to say it, but I doubt we'll ever get to the stage of sorting out all the world's problems. One of the problems of the world is that we are humans with different wants and desires and needs and demands and there is always bound to be conflict as a result to resolve.

But practically, I guess, it's about finding something you feel you fit in with, I don't know, maybe like a secular humanist group, an environmental group, a local campaign for better schooling, third world issues, amnesty, and working with them. Or to use the old feminist phrase, working through the personal, as "the personal is political" and just changing things that need to be changed in your relationships with others, family, friends, co-workers.

That breaks the task down a bit to something that can be achieved in a lifetime.

I think...

Still musing on all this as it's only less than three months since I lost my faith.

[futurekid]

Wow people!

 

I don't think what Marshall Brain was talking about was that difficult to grasp but that could be because I've already read the ending of his book Manna (I highly recommend you start at the beginning).

 

Another possible take on the better and better theme is The First Immortal by James Halperin. The namby-pamby view of heaven where everything is "fair" and "equal" is ridiculous and deep down we all know that. However a universe where every sentient being is able to find some use of its time that provides fulfillment without the need to worry about violation of its rights or happiness by other beings is certainly something that could be engineered.

 

Really to have a shot of achieving this ideal world we first need to convince people that it is a possibility. In "The First Immortal" people from the late 21st century look back condescendingly on the current era as the "Age of Lemmings". We really are by-and-large extremely dumb and myopic. Everyone goes through their lives with their noses to the grindstone and never really stops to take a look at the big picture.

 

Personally I have decided to be an immortalist and as soon as I can afford it I plan to sign up for cryogenics. While I hope to live long enough to not need to be frozen, I realize that there's enough stupidity and bigotry in the world that progress is being seriously set back on a daily basis and any number of things could make it worse.

 

A personal crusade of mine is to promote lunar solar power to replace all of our limited and harmful current sources of energy. A side benefit of this source of energy is that it could enable energy prosperity for all of earth's 10 billion people expected in 2050. If peak oil happens and we don't come up with a backup plan we could see the beginning of another world-wide dark age.

 

So: heaven on earth - nah, just a system where everyone can be who they want and do what they want. And if they are not naturally inclined to be industrious enough or assertive enough, or punctual enough, or whatever enough, I see transhumanism eventually providing them with the fix or cure that will make them a happy, healthy, successful transhuman and a credit to their society. We simply can't afford for the future to play out any other way.

 

Oh, one more point. Regarding human's natural desire to perform actions that infringe on the territory of others, I see no reason why the extremely high quality of virtual reality that will become possible by the middle of this century won't allow us to put any "confrontational" or "sadistic" personalities into virtual realms where they can be free to do whatever they want without causing harm and damage to the rest of us.

[Mad Ethel Rakem]

Okay, being serious.

1. Mankind is not improving. Neither is it getting worse. It's doing as all things do and existing in cycles.

2. A heaven on earth type thing would be temporary at best. Life isn't meant to be one stable thing. That makes it boring. Things must be shaken up and stirred a little. Otherwise weird, funky stuff starts to grow and rot. And, unfortunately, stirring things up usually maims and kills.

3. There's no way to create a paradise for everyone at the same time. People are too different. So no. What you would consider heaven to be would suck for someone else. And vice versa.

[♦ ficino ♦]

 

Hi, Alice. My answers are:

1. no

2. no

3. no

 

sorry. sigh

 

*sigh* ~ thank you. It would be good to hear your reasoning for arriving at these conclusions. I guess there are days and situations where brevity is a good thing - but in a discussion I miss the richness that comes from an exchange of views.

 

Hi, Alice. I read the link you provided in your OP. My bias is to distrust groups that announce themselves as a "we" who are going to set up a system to improve the world. I think people are selfish enough that the chaps and gals running such a new system will either use it for their own benefit or will attract lots of people who will, resulting in what we see now. I think there will always be elite groups that have a big disproportion of resources compared to large numbers of poor. That's my pessimism. I think the rest of the population can do much more to shed light on the scams perpetrated by those in power, to limit them, etc. That's the best I think is going to happen. It will be the age-old fluctuation of justice and injustice, wealth and poverty. I don't see a reason to think this will change.

 

so that's why I don't think there will be heaven on earth. I think each generation has its triumphs and its failures and dysfunctions. Remember how optimistic the leading classes were in the early 1900s? Then came World War I and totalitarian ideologies that promised to create utopias.

[Open_Minded]

I think in some ways where I am coming from on this - is that as an ex-christian I now feel much more engaged in the process of alleviating sufferng than I did as a christian.

 

Like I think I paid a lot of lip service to 'making the world a better place' - and I wasted a lot of time waiting around for God to 'open doors' for me ... Now as an ex-christian, its more - 'if its possible to alleviate suffering, I have to get on with it, no sitting on the side lines, its time to roll up my sleeves and get out there and make a difference'

 

The nagging voice of disillusionment says on the one hand (1) the task is too big and mankind keeps messing up too much and on the other (2) and if we sort out all the worlds problems - then what?

 

Hello Alice ....

 

Great topic..

 

A long time ago a professor in college said some words that have stuck in my mind ever since.

 

"It is important to take a long view of history, lest one become discouraged and give up."

 

That is where I land on these questions. I don't know if there ever will be a heaven on earth. But, taking a long view of history, I do believe that humanity is moving forward.

 

http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=712

 

This links to an article in the YES Magazine. The article just addresses one aspect of human history - but it has much to say about ways to view human growth as well. From the last paragraph:

 

History’s long arc

Just as the movement against the slave trade contributed to the struggles for workers rights and human rights in the 19th century, all three movements laid the foundations for the major social justice movements of the 20th century: the anti-imperialist movement, the women’s movement, the civil rights movement, the anti-apartheid movement, and more. Each of the older movements provides lessons for today’s activists. While some aspects of the current global justice movement are new—the use of the Internet for informing and organizing, small groups coordinating to produce mass demonstrations, and a high degree of economic literacy—its roots are deep. The latest technology, innovative protest styles, and information politics have been used for hundreds of years by activists seeking to oppose the devastating effects of global trade on their communities and communities in other countries. Perhaps the most important lesson to draw from this history is not to get discouraged by short-term defeats. The arc of history is long. Though it may not seem so at the time, each movement bends it further toward justice.

 

The thing is ... we live in a world where cultural energy is put into perceiving only the immediate and the sensational - mostly negative - aspects of human life. And so... we convince ourselves that all is lost.. that there is no hope ... and we give up on each other, on the idea that there is any lastiing meaning to life. And this act of giving up feeds the feeling that hope is lost.

 

One of the biggest responsibilities we have as a humans is to be intentional in looking beyond what is popular to see. There is always more to the picture .. but we have to look deeper than the picture presented on TV and in mainstream media.

[futurekid]

OK, maybe to change the topic just a bit here, but do any of you guys seriously have anything against paradise engineering? By paradise engineering I don't mean solving every problem ever and doping everybody up on endorphins permanently. I mean using technology and sociology to give every sentient being the opportunity to be all they can be. I mean ensuring that none of the horrible incidents described in the first few chapters of Why Won't God Heal Amputees? ever happen again while still giving people freedom to think and act as they see fit so long as they don't violate the rights and lives of others.

[Alice]

The general consensus seems to be that because we have such different ideas about what would constitute 'heaven' it would never be possible.

 

 

The namby-pamby view of heaven where everything is "fair" and "equal" is ridiculous and deep down we all know that. However a universe where every sentient being is able to find some use of its time that provides fulfillment without the need to worry about violation of its rights or happiness by other beings is certainly something that could be engineered.

 

Really to have a shot of achieving this ideal world we first need to convince people that it is a possibility.

....

 

Personally I have decided to be an immortalist and as soon as I can afford it I plan to sign up for cryogenics.

 

....

 

So: heaven on earth - nah, just a system where everyone can be who they want and do what they want. And if they are not naturally inclined to be industrious enough or assertive enough, or punctual enough, or whatever enough, I see transhumanism eventually providing them with the fix or cure that will make them a happy, healthy, successful transhuman and a credit to their society. We simply can't afford for the future to play out any other way.

 

Oh, one more point. Regarding human's natural desire to perform actions that infringe on the territory of others, I see no reason why the extremely high quality of virtual reality that will become possible by the middle of this century won't allow us to put any "confrontational" or "sadistic" personalities into virtual realms where they can be free to do whatever they want without causing harm and damage to the rest of us.

 

Futurekid - your concept of the future seems quite contradictory to me ... if I wasn't 'up to the mark' that constituted being a 'credit' to society, I would find it an infringement on my personal space if someone else was to impose a fix or a cure ... I wouldn't want to accept a 'virtual' world alternative (despite the time I spend on here!) ...

 

Also I have real reservations about immortality or extended life - I think there is something quite beautiful in the seasons of life and although I have not always found the 'transition' of one stage to another 'easy' , my life so far has taught me that each 'new age' I have become brings its own range of blessings ... I am happy to anticipate a time when my 'matter' will return to 'dust'.

 

 

OK, maybe to change the topic just a bit here, but do any of you guys seriously have anything against paradise engineering? By paradise engineering I don't mean solving every problem ever and doping everybody up on endorphins permanently. I mean using technology and sociology to give every sentient being the opportunity to be all they can be. I mean ensuring that none of the horrible incidents described in the first few chapters of Why Won't God Heal Amputees? ever happen again while still giving people freedom to think and act as they see fit so long as they don't violate the rights and lives of others.

 

I'm not quite sure what you are suggesting here ... care to elaborate?

[futurekid]

And if they are not naturally inclined to be industrious enough or assertive enough, or punctual enough, or whatever enough, I see transhumanism eventually providing them with the fix or cure that will make them a happy, healthy, successful transhuman and a credit to their society

 

Futurekid - your concept of the future seems quite contradictory to me ... if I wasn't 'up to the mark' that constituted being a 'credit' to society, I would find it an infringement on my personal space if someone else was to impose a fix or a cure ... I wouldn't want to accept a 'virtual' world alternative (despite the time I spend on here!) ...

 

First of all I forgot to put in there that if they are dissatisified with their industriousness, assertiveness, punctuality, etc. then they can do something about it. I do not endorse forcing them to become transhumans or to become productive if it isn't something they want. I am a libertarian in many ways although I can see sufficient complexity in the world to know that one policy doesn't fit all.

 

Also I have real reservations about immortality or extended life - I think there is something quite beautiful in the seasons of life and although I have not always found the 'transition' of one stage to another 'easy' , my life so far has taught me that each 'new age' I have become brings its own range of blessings ... I am happy to anticipate a time when my 'matter' will return to 'dust'.

 

As to your reservations about immortality or extended life: I'm certainly not going to argue with your right to hold those views. However I view our current culture as a "deathist" one. I can see the value of diversity in age as well as other areas. However how many people who were in decent health and fairly satisfied with their lives would choose to die the next day just because they had reached an arbitrary age such as three-score and ten?

 

Just because death and taxes have always been certainties, doesn't mean that we can't seek better answers than resignation. I hope I don't come off as trying to push my views on others. I just have chosen to take the perspective that a secular world-view can offer nearly as much long term hope as a supernatural world-view.

 

One thing that has always amazed me in many areas is how few people want to get the most out of themselves even on a 10-20 year basis. I realize not everyone can be Thomas Edison or Mother Teresa but it seems that nearly everyone has the basic ingredients for greatness in them yet so few strive to reach their potential. I suppose that I should not be surprised when very few strive to escape this mortal paradigm we have been born into.

 

As I've said for years, a mind that is not still open may as well be dead already. <-- This is not aimed at anyone but myself and I strive to live by it on a daily basis.

 

Thanks for your comments and questions Alice.

[NotBlinded]

I do think it is possible to create heaven on earth, but it has to start with each individual because the way the earth is now is because of individual beliefs.

 

Eckhart Tolle has a book A New Earth that addresses this and I agree with him. Here is a little review:

 

Building on the astonishing success of The Power of Now, Eckhart Tolle presents readers with an honest look at the current state of humanity: He implores us to see and accept that this state, which is based on an erroneous identification with the egoic mind, is one of dangerous insanity.

 

Tolle tells us there is good news, however. There is an alternative to this potentially dire situation. Humanity now, perhaps more than in any previous time, has an opportunity to create a new, saner, more loving world. This will involve a radical inner leap from the current egoic consciousness to an entirely new one.

 

In illuminating the nature of this shift in consciousness, Tolle describes in detail how our current ego-based state of consciousness operates. Then gently, and in very practical terms, he leads us into this new consciousness. We will come to experience who we truly are—which is something infinitely greater than anything we currently think we are—and learn to live and breathe freely.

 

So, I think it is possible and there are many more people comming to this understanding and leaving the fundamental mindsets that play a role in creating egoic states. It will be a long time comming though.

[futurekid]

notblindedbytheblight I'm curious how old you are? It has been my observation that those who truely think we can do something about the future and the many problems that still confront us are fairly young. I welcome all age groups to explore how they can make the future a better and more friendly place but it seems that many older people have entirely bought into the deathist mantra. BTW I'm 23 which is actually a bit on the old side among immortalists I've found.

[Mike D]

1. Do you think mankind is improving?

2. Do you think there will come a time when we can usher in a 'heaven on earth' existence.

3. and if so - will this be all its cracked up to be?

1. I do not think mankind either "improves" or "degrades", I think times change and mankind changes relative to it. In other words, we evolve. But I don't think evolution has anything to do with "better" or "worse" it just means "adapatable".

 

2. I guess it really depends on what your idea of heaven is, but for all practical purposes I would say no. I think it's just human nature to always want to strive for better so I don't think there is some ultimate state or nirvana that we could ever reach.

 

3. No, for reasons just stated.

[futurekid]

I saw this quote in someone's signature over at imminst and thought it seemed appropriate for this thread in a way.

 

In the future, the idea that death is inevitable will kill more people than all other causes of death combined.

[NotBlinded]

notblindedbytheblight I'm curious how old you are? It has been my observation that those who truely think we can do something about the future and the many problems that still confront us are fairly young. I welcome all age groups to explore how they can make the future a better and more friendly place but it seems that many older people have entirely bought into the deathist mantra. BTW I'm 23 which is actually a bit on the old side among immortalists I've found.

I'm 43...

 

There are a few of us old foggies that can break away from the mind and see that we can make a difference. It has to start with each one of us...there is nothing outside of ourselves that we didn't create (situations). We have to believe differently in order to start change.

 

I am so very happy that young people are not following in the footsteps of their elders. There is a season for change and I can smell its freshness!

 

1. I do not think mankind either "improves" or "degrades", I think times change and mankind changes relative to it. In other words, we evolve. But I don't think evolution has anything to do with "better" or "worse" it just means "adapatable".

Mike, I'm just using your quote to relate to something Tolle says in his book. He states this change of consciousness is an evolutionary necessity in order for humans to survive. It's like a fish that has been trapped in pond that was once attached to the sea. The fish tries to crawl out of the pond but finds himself very uncomfortable and crawls back in. The pond shrinks and becomes stagnant...the fish, through mutation, devolps the ability to breath and leaves the pond. The understanding that people have about this state of consiousness may be an evolutionary mutation that is needed for us to survive.

 

Just some more thoughts...