rcain wrote:i note that wiki hadn't bothered to fill out the 'political' schema section. and there didn't seem to be a 'technological' schema either, or an economic one, at least directly. is that because they are considered unimportant?
if so, i have to disagree.
Spengler's schema is indicative, not exact. For instance, I think he got the timing for the maturation of Western science wrong by more than a century. Its only now that a GUT is beginning to look probable.
But the general pattern does hold across multiple civilizations.
As to technology, that is entirely dependent on the science of a civilization. A science based on Aristotelian precepts or ch'i/qi is going to allow much more limited technological options than one based on Maxwell's equations and Heisenberg's Quantum Mechanics. Similarly, economics is in many ways proscribed by the civilization's world view. In both cases, if you can't imagine it you probably can't do it.
rcain wrote:in particular, i think some aspects of current civilization have passed 'points of no return'. one being our technological dependencies and capabilities, an at 'individual' level as well as 'political' and military levels.
from communications technology though to agriculture and trade.
or else there will be some horrible man-made disaster and we should be properly decimated and consumed by a dark-age.
IMO the GUT will signal the end of Western science. Technological elaboration will continue, but the basics it is based on will stagnate.
In part this will be a result of the discrediting of academia. The out of control nature of modern humanities scholarship has parallels in previous civilizations. Eventually the psychosis of the intelligentsia discredits not just humanities scholarship, but all scholarship. People become satisfied with the status quo and want the endless instability of late modernity to end. And it does end.
What scares me is that the science community will settle for a GUT that is a POS, which they know is a POS, but which they settle on due to simple exhaustion and dissipated ambition.
See ITER/Tokamaks for an object lesson in dissipated scientific ambition. Decades spent plugging away at something that has been an obvious blind alley for nearly as long. But they plug away regardless. Eventually such types ask the question "why am I bothering?"
rcain wrote:I'm with the Borg myself, as you know, but hedging my bets with a flutter on peremptory intervention by the Vulcans - as seen in the movie/'historical documents' - yes it does happen, just like BFR must happen else how are they gonna get the Bussard Skoop.... either way, an entertaining trek-citation always wins points, imho.
If Heim drive plays out, screw it all and ta ta to all. Me and my 10,000 closest friends will be heading out. Care to join?
Of course, same same with QED rockets powered by Bussards, but the scale and rate of possible dispersal is more limited.
And I always found the Romulans to be the most interesting. Coldly calculating yet passionate, honorable yet devious, vicious yet recognizably compassionate. Like the Mirror Universe, they are far more interesting than the Feddies and the overly hormonalized Klingons. Unlike all other empires in Trek, their people don't get typecast into one role. And they have sufficient ruthlessness to realize their ambitions.
Duane
