Asimov's Lecture on Humanity

As a young intelligent member of the 21st century, I found Issac Asimov's predictions to be sometimes accurate, sometimes wrong, and most times still yet to be determined. When Asimov said pollution will impact the earth and affect our ability to produce food, this is certainly true. However, it is not a cooler earth that we worry about today as Asimov predicted, but actually a warmer one. When Asimov said birth rates would continue to expand and death rates would continue to go down, he was right, at least partially. Asimov said we would have 7 billion people on earth by the year 2000, we actually have 6 billion. Also in some parts of the world, more developed countries like the United States, the birth rate is actually under control.
Interestingly, Asimov is most accurate when he talks about things that will come true if we lower our birth rate which he says he doesn't believe we'll do. However, I think this is an example of Asimov's sarcasm. I believe he really believes humans will make an effort to control birth rates. This is why he spends so much time talking about the things that will happen if we do so.
Asimov uses his stories and antedotes to help us understand the points he is trying to make and also I believe to put us at ease when he's speaking about scary subjects like pollution, famine, and death. As I said, when Asimov makes predictions about the future of the world if we make the right choice, he is very accurate. For example, he said that women will have fewer children and as result they will have the time to focus on education and will hold the same jobs as men. Certainly, this has become reality especially in countries like ours. Asimov also states as people live longer they will want to learn for the sake of learning as apposed to simply having an education to get a job. He said that people will have more than one career and that learning will become a life long process as opposed to something you do only when your young. Again, certainly in countries like the United States we see this happening.
I think countries like the United States and some of the countries of Europe have taken great steps in controlling their birth rates, and as result have seen many of the good things that Asimov predicted. While other developing countries such as Asia and Africa have not and those countries have seen millions of people dying from famine and war, again just just Asimov predicted.
Our goal as a people should be to do exactly as Asimov said. Birth rate control has to be done world wide not just in parts of the world for it to truly lead to the positive things Asimov said will happen for all of the people on the planet. If we can lower the birth rate world wide we might even see an end to racism, sexism, and the end of war as Asimov predicted.
Asimov uses synoptic synthesis throughout his lecture, in fact he actually refers to Aristotle's syllogisms throughout his lecture. If you think about it, Asimov's major prediction is an example of a syllogism. Major Premise: The world can only produce enough food for a certain number of people. Minor Premise: As birth rates increase and death rates decrease the world will have too many people to feed. Conclusion: More people will have to die or fewer will have to be born for the world to survive. Asimov sarcasticly says we as a people will choose more people dying but I really believe that he believes that we will choose fewer people being born and because he is trying to make that case to us he spells out the many benefits to us as a people if we make the right choice.

Meaningless Lives?

"If there is one indisputable fact about the human condition it is that no community will survive if it is persuaded --or even suspects-- that its members are leading meaningless lives in a meaningless universe."


I agree with Kristol's conclusion if people were to believe or suspect there is no greater purpose than just being here, a community would not prosper. If members of a community had no reason to hope, wonder, question and they lived only for the moment eventually this community will be overwhelmed by greed, desire, instant gratification, and ultimately this community will be dominated by people without virtue and eventually deteriorate.

I believe Kristol's premise relates both to the position of Russell and Socrates. Both Russell and Socrates saw great value in asking questions, in the desire to aquire information by continiously seeking out answers. Philosophy would have no value in a community that in essence did not believe in a tommorrow. Why ask questions if the answers won't change anything? Russell believed that only by having an open mind could a community truly prosper; Socrates made the same point on the Apology. He defended himself against the accusers by essentially accusing them of being the type of person Kristol describes and pointing out that a person who has an open mind about the things we don't know for sure are persons of virtue.