Katawa Shoujo Forums

?

That was a fascinating experience to read about.

You know, your tale is actually somewhat a story about how evolution made us lazy. Humans developed certain tools - our senses - with which we can navigate through life. And those tools got more and more refined to the point that we don't need to actively think about them. You don't need to think about seeing. You don't need to think about hearing. It's already in your system. It's only when you lose something you realize how important it was to you.

It isn't necessarily a bad thing-- if anything, it made us save energy to use on other tasks we can focus on. But what it does do, is reduce our feeling of the now. Our feeling of being aware of the moment.

Your story reminded me of something I learned about in class. You may find it interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness_(psychology)

Reksho wrote:That was a fascinating experience to read about.

You know, your tale is actually somewhat a story about how evolution made us lazy. Humans developed certain tools - our senses - with which we can navigate through life. And those tools got more and more refined to the point that we don't need to actively think about them. You don't need to think about seeing. You don't need to think about hearing. It's already in your system. It's only when you lose something you realize how important it was to you.

It isn't necessarily a bad thing-- if anything, it made us save energy to use on other tasks we can focus on. But what it does do, is reduce our feeling of the now. Our feeling of being aware of the moment.

Your story reminded me of something I learned about in class. You may find it interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness_(psychology)

Evolution didn't make us lazy. Technological advancement did.

That certainly was interesting... And quite brave of you to 'endure' it a whole day. But up to this point you only have experienced how to navigate in your house (no offense intended, just constructive feedback). Can you imagine yourself using public transport while blind? That is, I think, one of the more difficult aspects for the blind, considering a lot of it relies on exclusively visual signals (and a lot relies on exclusively audible signals too... which is annoying for me as a deafie).

Oh and I wouldn't bother doing the exact experiment again for deafness, as you can do a huge lot of solo activities without sound. It's outside when you actually notice the restrictions that deafness has due to exclusively audible signals as well as social contact.

That's awesome! I would love to try this sometime, you are a brave and thoughtful person to do this. I think it is really interesting how many of our activities rely on visual stimuli. I thought about my day after reading this, and I realize, like you did, I probably wouldn't be able to do any of my normal activities. Reading, gaming, writing, studying...well yeah.

This was really cool to read.

Xanatos wrote:

Reksho wrote:That was a fascinating experience to read about.

You know, your tale is actually somewhat a story about how evolution made us lazy. Humans developed certain tools - our senses - with which we can navigate through life. And those tools got more and more refined to the point that we don't need to actively think about them. You don't need to think about seeing. You don't need to think about hearing. It's already in your system. It's only when you lose something you realize how important it was to you.

It isn't necessarily a bad thing-- if anything, it made us save energy to use on other tasks we can focus on. But what it does do, is reduce our feeling of the now. Our feeling of being aware of the moment.

Your story reminded me of something I learned about in class. You may find it interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness_(psychology)

Evolution didn't make us lazy. Technological advancement did.

Same thing, different name. Evolution is nature's equivalent of technological advancement. =p

?

ingway wrote:I'm pretty sure that very few of us here still write handwritten letters to someone for the sake of talking to one another - but we have all used text or email or skype ... and the subject matter has more than likely lessened significantly considering the lack of involvement in the relating of said subject.

Actually, I still write handwritten letters if the subject matter is significant. I like the symbolism. And much like Iwanako, I enjoy the distance at times. Technology has basically rendered us without need of evolution though. The more technology advances, the more insulated from nature we become. Transhumanism is the inevitable end to that path...And I personally will be glad to see it come.

Have you ever been in a sensory deprivation tank? I've always wanted to...

Xanatos wrote:Technology has basically rendered us without need of evolution though.

That's not true at all. There's maybe no NEED for evolution, as in a need to survive. But there's still room for improvement, rendering evolution needed.

Our current state of evolution dictates how far we can go with technology. We are limited in our scope to expand our technologies. Basically, we can only go so far with our current level of creating new technology. For us to go beyond that limitation, we need to evolve ourselves further so that we can come up with new technologies. Things we would have never come up with if we weren't evolved further.

Technology is dependant on evolution.

That was a really interesting read, perhaps I should do something similar when I end up being home alone, since it'd be kind of difficult to explain to people why I am walking around crashing into things and that I am, in fact, still sane.

I have tried something remotely similar before, namely eating with my feet, albeit not for a whole day. Maybe I should try doing that for a day as well...

Or perhaps the ultimate challenge - go a day without using eyes or arms

?

ingway wrote:Considering the rather short span of evolution since we hit homo sapien and the even shorter span of modern science I don't think it's fair to judge our evolutionary possibilities based on a few cultures misuse of technology, even if it is somewhat of a seemingly vast epidemic, those societies who have no contact with any technology are not evolving in any way that is more or less radical than our own - only differently from what we idealize as evolution. An excellent example is the study of how societies which reject traditional technology in lieu of traditional things like agriculture and care-giving ... while not as effective on a large scale as other larger societies that have, see less incursions of cancer and physical abnormality.

Ah, but I am not basing my argument on the lifespan of the human being alone. Other life forms are also proof that technology is indeed dependant on evolution. I think you and I can both agree that we - human beings - are further evolved than one-cell organisms and simple life forms. This because we have cells and other simple life forms in our bodies from which we are compromised of. This means we are a complex version of these simpler life forms, hence being further evolved. A life form like a plant for example is not something we can compare ourselves to in terms of evolution. A plant is evolved differently in other areas where it is important for its own survival-- it's evolved on another scale, if you will.

Let me define what technology is. Technology is one's ability to create solutions to a problem. The higher the technology, the higher the quantity and complexity of the solutions you can come up with for a problem.

Now, considering these simpler versions of ourselves, one could argue that they do not have technology as advanced as ours. BUT, these creatures do have abilities to solve problems. They can turn to their environment and create methods and tools to sustain themselves. Therefore, they have a form of technology. And their level of technology is dependant on their level of evolution.

My point is, let's say the limit of technology for a simple life form is the creation of a stone hammer. Assume that this is the very best they can come up with in terms of new technology, nothing will ever trump that in their entire existence. What this means is that they have achieved the limit of their level of evolution and created the smartest thing they can possibly can. For them to go further than that, they have to go a level higher on the evolution scale so that they can remove the boundary and develop more complex technology.

Cultural evolution's taken over biological evolution since like homo erectus lol.
The thing about humans is that unlike other animals that change to meet the demands of the environment, we alter the environment to suit our needs.
Having features we don't need is only a waste of energy, so I wouldn't say relying on technology (i.e using an external source of energy) is a bad thing

Reminds me of the day I spent completely mute. My high school was doing this anti-smoking campaign, saying that 35 people a day die from smoking-related illnesses. To demonstrate, 35 people were chosen at random to pretend to be dead. Well, if the 35 people just didn't go to school that day, it wouldn't have much effect, since there are 800 people at my school. So, me and the other 34 chosen wore white shirts with a large "35" painted on them. We were told to not to speak to anybody the entire day, not even to the other 34 people chosen. And so we did. It was easy for the more introverted people. It was kinda difficult for me,because I'm a joker, a snarker, I like making the occasional witticism. But it made me realize that it's tough. Real tough. Basic hand signals can only go so far, and writing is inconvient.

A day mute is easy enough...I've been meaning to try a day blind. Problem is most of my day is spent online, where I need my eyes...Though I'm actually faurly good at typung withoyr sighr. (Which I just did there.)