is technology just an evolution of human consciousness?
611559
Many speculate that the www, the web of communication we use so freely these days, is representative of the etheric web where telepathy takes place.  If you look at it that way we're getting pretty darn close to instantaneous communication.  So, yes, I do believe technology is an expression of the evolution of our consciousness.  Good question btw.
349763
I'm not sure that you're correct that we actually understand more now than we did before.  It is still a common assumption that we only use 10% of our brains.  What would we know if we were able to use the other 90%?  We still have no idea what really exists outside of our immediate environment, however far that goes into space, we can only assume that we've only scratched the surface.  Despite all the things that we can create, we cannot get close to re-creating a telescopic lens as diverse as the human eye, nor can we create a shock absorbing device nearly as complex as the knee.  Yes, we are making incredible progress in certain areas, but we will never know everything.  Secondly, my relationship with Christ is not a result of me wanting to understand the world in which I live.  It is a result of a desire to be with the one who created me.  So, to answer your question, some religions may fail, they will be proven useless.  However, a relationship with Christ will never be unnecessary.
433918
Not anymore. It would have been several years ago, but once something becomes present technology, by definition, it is no longer futuristic.
573945
No, but that may be based on the literal translation of the word "everything"!\n\nOne way to answer that is to look back over the last 10 years and see where have we been and how far have we gone.  \n\nTechnology is moving at a faster pace than all other areas.  However, it is not really moving that fast.  \n\nRich companies and rich leaders are getting richer because they have found a secret.  The secret is to let out a little new stuff every two to three years to cause mass buying of their product.  They leave some errors "BUG" in them so that people are not completely satisfied and must buy the update when it comes out.  The process keeps repeating itself over and over.  Why put out a great product if you can sell a good product several times within the next 10 years?!  No, we will not be that much farther a head in 10 years, but over time we will have computers will have evolved to do a lot more.  \n\nWe will have something like a computer/TV/radio/telephone/home security/home monitor/ whatever all built into one thinking computer!  How long it takes is up to the Rich guy in Washington State!  He did not become the riches guy in the world by being dumb!
635929
It depends on how you are defining "civilized". If you are referring to things that we have and use to make our lives better/easier, then yes. Technology has brought us so very, very far in the past 50 years. We have so many things, that most of us take for granted, that were only pipe-dreams 50 years ago.\nOn the other hand, if you are referring to how we are, act, or behave, we have sadly declined. As others spoke of, it used to be that everyone left their doors unlocked - you knew everyone who lived around you, if not the entire town - you could walk next door and borrow a tool, even a tractor, of a neighbor, and as a whole, everyone was assured of the fact that anything that was borrowed, was always returned in a timely manner - in the same, or possibly better shape as when first borrowed - \nYou weren't bombarded with stories of murders, terrorists, and child-molesters, on the news EVERY night.\nI could go on and on...but do I really need to?\n\nSo, it really breaks down to what you really meant when you said, "civilization".\nJust pick which answer suits your opinion.\nThanks for the question...have a good day, now.
955210
Nature did not intend for people to meet each other by electronics.\n\nVision, sight, smell, touch, real time experience are the means by which Nature intended humans to interact with each other.
778896
Ya so whats your point? \nHumans the products of power, no humans are the end result of million of years of evolution.\nPower held the world together I would argue that Power has almost torn the world apart on more then one occasion.\nyes we have a highly developed brain although on any given day just watching those around you would lead you to question the validity of that statement.
299050
Past - Really Big Calculators. Originally considered no more than a number cruncher, 'programs' were primarily business oriented. Accounting, Scientific, etc. At the time, only a handful of people on the planet ever considered they would be more than the 'science fiction' movies of the time portrayed them.\nPresent - Computer jargon is very much a part of our ordinary lives. Nearly every appliance in a modern house contains more computing power than that which ran the moonshot missions. A significant percentage of the world's populace could not conceive of a world without computers. More than business, computers are our entertainment, our transportation, communication, our virtual life.\nFuture - Further human integration. Smart Computers will run our everyday lives: feeding us, tools for work & play, our sole means of communication with those around us. Further progress for implants into humans will allow 'hands free' operation. No money, cards, phones, etc. will be required past the optics to access personal links to the worldwide net.\n\nIf we happen to survive that long.
1176018
Eventually, I think we will, but I'm an optimist.\n\nWe get closer and closer all the time. (With some pretty regular steps backward, too.) There's tons of work being done on the brain, and that's undoubtedly the engine of mind. But in areas like psychology, philosophy, psychiatry, anthropology--the list goes on and on--we refine ideas and concepts constantly, and come to clearer understanding of the mind.\n\nEven the military applications of knowledge of the mind get better and better. (I mean things like breaking down ego for purposes of getting information and so on.) I hate to think about it, but it does add to man's knowledge.\n\nWe have a heck of a long way to go, but I think we've come a long way.\n\nAs far as "using merely the human mind," what the heck else would we use? All of our tools are products of the human mind, aren't they?
885178
Research suggests that within the next century not only will we completely understand the human brain but computer processing power will far exceed it. Therefore we should not only be able to replicate the brain but should be able to create a far superior machine or human version 2. Depending on how we as humans merge with this new technology will determine whether we are part of this superior race or seen in the future as a lesser being. Either way endless and exciting possibilities are around the corner I don't think we will be waiting 1000's or even 100's of years.
647798
Homo Sapiens appeared about 100,000 years ago. Without any scienctific inteference at gene level, I suspect there won't be much difference physically, but they will hopefully be fitter and better fed at the world level, with longer and better lives as diseases are eradicated or controlled.\nHowever, if we look at the advances made since the industrial revolution and the earlier age of enlightenment, we will be talking an amazing and unpredictable future, assuming we don't wipe ourselves out. Compared to the 100,000 years we've been here, we've developed the majority of our current technology over a miniscule 300years and the increase in advanced technology culminating in electronics and computers in reality over the last 50, although obviously based on earlier work. It's a really amzing time we're living in, but hopefully the rest of the world will ultimately benefit from the globalisation of technology in a positive environmental and social way and not as is currently the norm of wanton profligate usage of natural resources of western "developed" societies and the random conflicts of the world's societies as a whole.\nMaybe in the next 10,000 years we'll grow up?
956071
Computers are lacking in their capability to learn. They tend to surpass humans in pure rationality issues, and eventually they'll be better at certain things humans are good at intuitively just by taking in enough information. However, the algorithms for a computer's intelligence requires everything to be objective. So there's no way for it to interpret something unless there's an algorithm there to determine how to interpret it. In short, the brain is self-programming. A computer does not really have that capability. To do such would require human beings knowing how to program computers that can program brains. And at that point, we might as well just program our own damned brains to be like that.\n\nBut in terms of raw processing speed, sure, computers will eventually surpass mankind. After all, if nothing else, they're likely using superior technology. All we have is a bunch of neurons and whatnot.
809803
Great question. \n\nYour analogy to man-made devices is somewhat of a backwards take on things, as most machinery is actually made to mimic living things.  Nevertheless, machines or beings, both are designed to take some form of energy from the surrounding environment, and convert it into work.\n\nIn that regard, the brain is very much like a computer that controls the body, but it has one amazing difference that artificial intelligence can't approach (yet.)  The ability to recognize, store and relate patterns to one another.  This is how people are able to do simple things that are beyond the most powerful computers. \n\nWhile our brains do function in a (sort of) binary way, with the firing of neurons occurring or not occurring, they also are able to instantly interconnect experiences (which are just patterns of neurons that fire in a prescribed way based on the chemical triggers) to form new patterns which didn't exist beforehand.  In other words, WE LEARN. What's more amazing is that we can relate things INSTANTLY.  Think about how you can recall a memory from an hour ago, yesterday, or your childhood all in the same span of time.  You can also experience something in the present, instantly connect it to something that happened thirty years ago, and then immediately act on the combination of both the old and new information almost without thinking.  It's miraculous.\n\nThe ability to think like this no doubt stemmed from our animalistic past, and the need to survive previously inexperienced phenomenon, but over time, we've adapted it to be able to create, envision, and imagine things that don't yet exist.  This is something that has plagued computer scientists working on A.I. since the beginning.\n\nGetting back to your original question, I guess we should ask ourselves, does the brain exist to control the body, or does the body exist to transport the brain around it's environment.  Since, over time, intelligence seems to increase in complexity, one would have to say that the body exists to transport the brain around.  This leads us to ask, did intelligence occur spontaneously, or was the body designed to be programmed?  \n\nWith computers, the limitation to the capabilities of the software is ALWAYS the hardware.  Even though programmers always find clever ways of doing things with limited hardware, there is always a limit.  So far, this doesn't seem to be the case with the human brain.  There seems to be no limit to how sophisticated our thought processes can become.  We may only be able to remember and recall a certain amount of information, but being able to INNOVATE, and create previously unimagined connections between things seems to be limitless.  In a sense, we are able to continually "re-write" our own operating systems, based on the new things we learn.  Thank goodness too, because what a drag to think there was a limit on how much we could learn or know.\n\nFor this reason, I'd have to say that if our brains are like computers, they haven't been "programmed" with software in any conventional sense.  They are just too fluid and adaptable to be compared to something as limited as a computer.
1124348
Not really:  I see it more as 'coming full circle.'\n\nFirst, in the olden days, (before TV, movies, & even radio!) people entertained each other all the time.  People who played paino or guitar or harmonica were the musical part of the 'program,' everyone knew (as we do now) at least one quick wit who was good for laughs, and if nothing else, the dumbest person in the group could be counted upon to say or do somethign interesting now & then.  And, all of this could be entertaining without reaching the same level of sophistication because it made up for that by allowing direct, immediate feedback.  Entertainment was more of a conversation; likewise, conversation was a bigger part of entertainment.\n\nWith the coming of all these professional entertainment technologies, people saw the possibilities of the entertainment becoming more sophisticated, but didn't recognize what they were giving up in exchange.  But it also didn't matter, because they didn't spend so much time at computers (or, to a lesser extent) on the phone.  Instead, they were conducting much of their business & personal affairs face-to-face.  So, they still had enough direct-feedback, face time in their lives.\n\nNow, we spend SO MUCH LESS time directly interacting with each other, we have (consciously  or subconsciously) come to realize that the polished and very impersonal entertainment no longer makes up for the missing interaction.  So, we come back around to a more 'personal' form of entertainment.\n\nWe're still not finished, though.  The level of feedback available has increased, but I'm guessing that it still isn't enough to fulfill our social needs.  There will either be another shift that makes entertainment even more personal (more 2-way webcamming may be one way that happens,) or people will begin to drift farther away from all the electronic entertainments, in favor of more personal time.  That would be a continuation of the trend away from movies & TV, and toward the internet, of which this site is an exellent example of 'conversations.'
655103
Are you suggesting that with improving technology we are living less long?\nIf so I can think of nowhere to find evidence to say you are correct.\nGenerally, improving technology goes hand in hand with greater lifespans, although the relationship is far from causal in every case.
54151
The personal computer I use every day has almost nothing in common with my ancestor's technology.\nWith that out of the way, I am also convinced that almost all technology is the result of women.  Left to ourselves, with no women to spur us on, men would probably be satistied living in caves and going hunting and fishing everyday.  All it took was a mate or daughter to say: "Hey, wouldn't it be nice if ..." to get us going.\nNow women are able to join the process directly and technology is moving at a much faster pace.
866852
For increased surface area for cerebral functions (whatever they are). I personally believe that at some point early in our evolution we used our brains a lot LOT more than we do now (80-90% vs. 4%) for telekinesis, telepathy, be able to perceive more than 3 dimensions...and all sorts of things...even to ascend to a higher plane of existence...\nBut we seem to have lost that ability...(or been forced to forget??)