Will huts help us share our mammoth meat more peacefully? Will huts make Atkinson Clan stop beating up Montanas? Will huts make Montanas any less annoying?
Mark my words, sisters and brothers. These problems will go with us wherever we build huts. Until we learn to make Montanas less annoying and Atkinsons less murderous, I say we stay in these caves.
On one end, "cavemen" are sustainable humans with implied cultural virtues. On the other, the pre agricultural equilibria is mostly about high human mortality and low population size.
At any given time though, people often had cultural understandings of natural ecosystems. We started being humans by living as part of such ecosystems, and undoubtedly both caused and witnessed all sorts of sudden changes and disasters... some linked to human activity.
If you live in an areas, and rely on plants, game and such... your culture is more likely to be "literate" in these things. Game can be hunted out, plants overharvested. A population surge in one species may deplete another. "Balance" can be restored, sometimes in a more or less beneficial way than before. These are all observable, and of great interest to people (those left) who make their living this way. The occasional and unpredictable flush of rabbits one autumn, is relevant to the life of someone who eats them.
/grandiose We are genetically programmed to live for a few decades, reproduce, and care for our kin (both blood and tribe) in a world which was limitless (relative to us as individuals.) I deeply fear this is the sad answer to the Fermi paradox. Now, our survival depends on outsmarting our short-sighted genes.
Why? What's the downside to littering on some random asteroid? There's no ecosystem that would care – not even bacteria – nothing and nobody would mind if you drop a plastic bag on 423 Diotima. Take a step back and think about why pollution on Earth is bad, and you'll realize that "polluting" an asteroid isn't ethically wrong.
Of course, that only applies as long as those asteroids are utterly devoid of life. Once there's an ecosystem, polluting becomes ethically wrong again.
Also, is there a term for this kind of weird corporate anecdote? Why are these so common in the business world lol
Of course, that only applies as long as those asteroids are utterly devoid of life. Once there's an ecosystem, polluting becomes ethically wrong again.
Why? There is no ecosystem on top of Everest yet people will get upset when they see what it looks like.
This is an aesthetic decision, not a moral one.