Like every other civilisation, mankind seems to have reached a point where we seem to have reached a end stretch in our potential. Even though there is still so much more scope for improvement and advancements, we still have fairly accomplished the ability to work with everything we have found; in the terms of cosmologists, humanity as a species is classified as a type A civilisation, one that is able to harness all the resources available on the planet. But with reaching such a latter stage in our timeline, the question that rises is ‘what next?’
If one pays attention to the timelines of human civilisations, one would agree that all civilisations till now have had their origins and endings. There have been many theories on social change and evolution, some by more notable sociologists like the German Karl Marx and the American Pitirim Sorokin. However, this brings us to a question we must ask ourselves, in order to try to understand as much as we can, for a potential future. Will our civilisation, like others in the past, die? Or will it evolve into something else?
For that, we must first understand society and how it works and evolves.
According to The Dictionary of Sociology and Social Sciences (Fairchild 1966), social change refers to ‘Variations or modifications in any aspect of social process, pattern, or form… Social change may be progressive or regressive, permanent or temporary, planned or unplanned, unidirectional or multidirectional, beneficial or harmful.’ There have been many theories on the necessarily and causality of social change, but it universally agreed that it is an inevitability.
Until recently, there seemed to be a trend with civilisations, as massive as the Mayans in South America, and as minuscule as the Maori from New Zealand. All societies were born out of evolution or revolution, all peaked, and all got wiped out eventually. Irrespective or the method of it’s dematerialising from existence, all civilisations showcased that path.
There are many methods and theories for social change, backed by a sufficient amount of data, and it’s safe to say that they all make valid points. The initial, and maybe most logical to believe until recently, is the unilinear theory. One of the major unilinear theories of social evolution was stated by French philosopher Auguste Comte, as he assumed every society passes through the same fixed stages of development. In contrast to such evolutionary theories, there are even theories that propose civilisations rise and fall in an endless series of cycles, knowing as cyclical theories. However, whether one believes in the cyclical nature, or even the unilinear nature, it is difficult to argue that civilisations do not have any evolution at all. Universally it is agreed that mankind and his lifestyle has changed drastically in time, whether for good or for bad, and is backed by a substantial amount of supporting evidence.
So, if civilisations have risen and fallen since times memorial, then surely ours will too, right? If history is anything to go by, it’s extremely likely. It might happen tomorrow, or a decade from now, but it eventually will, at least that’s what our history books will say. But despite that, there are many factors to consider.
One of the main ideas that could avoid history repeating itself, is the fact that civilisations from earlier days were distinct from one another. Unlike the current scenario, where we’re surrounded by a plethora of cultures, our civilisation is more or less the same. The increase in similarities, between civilisations, has come up because of phenomena like globalisation and modernisation. Even though we have a lot of war stricken countries, humanity is at it’s most peaceful stage in life.
Despite the fact that there are many cultures fighting between themselves, there are so many more who are working towards a common goal. The world is now a global village and it’s nothing like we’ve ever seen before. But for how long will it be as such?
Before we go ahead and analyse what’s to come, let us understand how things are and how they have been. Until the boom of globalisation in the 1800s with the invention of the steamboat and telegraph, life was pretty different to what it is now, in the modern age. Since communication and transportation was so difficult, cultures were not only miles apart in lifestyle and social construct, but it was the reason for multiple civilisations to exist. In contrast, with all the technological advances, people in Australia are not too different from people in Brazil.
We must concede that now there is a new form of distinction, which is a class and economic based categorisation, there is still no disparity between different cultures or civilisation. What this means is that as time has passed and newer technologies and ideas have been incepted, we have come closer and closer as a species, to the point that we are almost one global community, with different cultures having different ways of leading similar lives.
If we take a moment to understand the current scenario from different angles, it will become apparent how life has transitioned and what path it might take in the future. The growth rate has been more of a ever-increasing-in-steepness curve rather than a line, and that means, as time passes, the emphasis on technological advancement increases. From 1903, which is little over a century ago, where technological inventions were being explored twice as much as 1803, it was at a minute speed as compared to today with newer tech coming out by the day, or even the hour. Not only has communication and transport improved, but even other facets have stepped up drastically. Life is so much more convenient from a technological standpoint that we can say in about 10-50 years, we would be able to successfully harness every bit of energy is available.
At such a rapid pace, we cannot estimate how life is going to change. There seem to be two likely futures for humanity: one where we don’t care enough that the physical environment around us decides to do something about our careless use of resources, and the other alternative is that we excel so much in our ideas and technology, that one day a line is closed and some irreversible steps are taken in the process. Let us analyse both these scenarios.
Firstly, our environment. Every day, we are subjected to numerous forms of media and feeds mentioning our ever increasing footprint on our planet. As much as we would all want to leave our mark, the sort of mark humanity seems to be leaving is a substantial issue. According to the World Bank, the energy consumption per person in India itself was around 142 kilowatt hour (kWh) in 1980, and in twenty years it increased by over 250 kWh to become 395 kWh in 2000, and then in less than fifteen years, it increased by over 400 kWh to become 805 kWh in 2014. On a planet took over 500 years to reach to 4 billion people, we’ve taken only another 40 years to increase to 7 billion in 2018. With the increased amount of energy consumed, added to the fact that the amount of people on the planet is increasing substantially by the second, it’s no wonder that things are getting bad to worse on an environmental aspect. Arguably, overpopulation and resource consumption are not the worst concerns for the environment right now, with pollution taking the number one spot. It has been proven that global warming keeps getting worse because of the way we pollute our surroundings, be it plastic in the ocean, or indisputable garbage in the mountains. If our habits don’t stop, the environment will stop humanity as a mere reflex action.
If someone is led to think that the environment is our only foe, then it would be devastating to realise that there might just be another. Theoretical Physicist and Cosmologist Stephen Hawking suggested that humans are one of the worst enemies of humans. Known all over as one of the most intellectual persons in history, Hawking predicts that other than global warming, an Artificial Intelligence apocalypse and even a nuclear war are two extremely likely as the end game for humans. Speaking to BBC in 2017 he said, ”There is no sign of conflict lessening, and the development of militarised technology and weapons of mass destruction could make that disastrous.” If Stephen Hawking’s lines are not enough to convince anyone, modern day engineer and entrepreneur Elon Musk has testified against the idea.
Since it seems to be difficult to gain perspective being so close to the issue, let’s take a few steps back. Actually, let’s assess this situation, not as a human, but from a omniscient perspective. Let us understand our position from a third person view. This brings us to the last idea, which is actually a derivative of another topic.
Along with the two concepts mentioned above, there is a theory known as The Fermi Paradox, named after physicist Enrico Fermi. With the discussion on the possibility of alien life, came the question, “where is everybody?” In reference to why we haven’t been in contact with any extra terrestrial beings. One scenario that pops up is that each planet has a certain number of filters that it has to check before it can host life. Since we haven’t come across any, it’s possible that all inhabitable planets around us did not fulfil all stages of the filters, which means our planet has passed through all stages, and therefore hosts life. The worse alternative to that is that our planet being a relatively younger planet, hasn’t been through all the stages, which means that a stage where humanity won’t be able to adapt to, is likely.
There are thousands of theories on the potential end of our species, some more notable and viable than others. However, it is theory that suggests that there seems to be an end to humanity and civilisation. It might be in a decade, or maybe even a century; but it does seem likely that it will happened. Will life actually end though? There is no way of knowing beforehand. But there is little evidence that says humanity is forever.
In conclusion, every parameter suggests that humanity will end, whether sooner or later. The only way that we can be saved is our will power and attitude towards the future, which might change how things work out. What can we do? We must take a collective stance against disastrous outcomes. We must understand that there’s a lot at stake, and change our ways. Will we survive? Will we adapt? It is difficult to say. We might live, or we might die. What actually will happen, only time will tell.
Reference Websites
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/5804088/stephen-hawking-end-of-the-world-predictions/
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
http://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/environmental-degradation-facts
http://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/environmental-degradation-facts
http://fortune.com/2017/08/30/elon-musk-ai-healthcare/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Fermi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox
https://interestingengineering.com/10-ways-humans-impact-the-environment
Books
Oxford’s Contemporary Sociology by M. Francis Abraham
Sociology Themes and Perspectives by Martin Holborn and Peter Langley
Carlton roy D'Silva 