Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Ice111 acea: on 10/1/19 at 8:40am UTC, wrote Something concerning these tools is that they are very accurate. This is...

edu birdie: on 12/5/18 at 9:50am UTC, wrote excel assignment help

edu birdie: on 12/5/18 at 9:49am UTC, wrote It' actually a great and helpful piece of information. I am glad that you...

sasa sasa: on 4/25/17 at 1:30am UTC, wrote OBAT MAAG adalah obat yang paling manjur untuk mengobati stroke.OBAT MAAG...

Darius M: on 6/22/14 at 9:51am UTC, wrote Humanity should live according to the laws of the Universe. ...

Luca Valeri: on 6/6/14 at 23:28pm UTC, wrote Hi Charles Great Essay. I agree in every point. I think you made a...

Toby Lightheart: on 6/4/14 at 7:35am UTC, wrote Hi Charles, You've conveyed many important issues that humanity faces...

Charles St Pierre: on 5/28/14 at 3:55am UTC, wrote Dear Israel, Thanks for reading my essay. I'm glad you liked it, and I...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "FQXI you too I need your help, come all too we have a work to do there..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "lol REVOLUTION SPHERISATION everywhere at all scales,REVOLUTION..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "The kind of time required, over which the material change is happening, (to..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Steve Dufourny: "after all like Borh has made,this universe and its spheres for me are like..." in Alternative Models of...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar piece of..." in First Things First: The...

Lorraine Ford: "With the “A.I. Feynman” software, Silviu-Marian Udrescu and Max Tegmark..." in Will A.I. Take Over...

Georgina Woodward: "Coin toss co-state potentials: With the measurement protocol decided, in..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 23, 2019

CATEGORY: How Should Humanity Steer the Future? Essay Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: How should humanity steer the future? by Charles Gregory St Pierre [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre wrote on May. 2, 2014 @ 18:16 GMT
Essay Abstract

For humanity to steer the future, four things must be determined. Humanity first must evaluate its current situation, and that of its world. It must determine where it wants to go, what kind of a society it wants to create, and what resources it shall have available to it. It must determine how to get there, or what desirable state it can attain. And it must decide who will do the steering. If its situation is determined to be urgent, then prompt and large scale action may be required for its survival. Starting with institutions of learning, society may need to be mobilized. The nation's ruling oligarchy and vested interests must be converted and involved, as they will otherwise oppose change, even that necessary for society's survival. Various other steps are outlined. Nations, and even just institutions, must be prepared to initiate action on their own, and lead by example. While we argue for urgency, there may instead be grounds for complacency. On the other hand, since we as elites are isolated from the worst aspects of humanity's situation, that situation may be worse than we appreciate.

Author Bio

Born 1950 Dropped out of MIT in 1972. Life spent in self discovery and other dissolute intellectual pursuits.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Georgina Woodward wrote on May. 3, 2014 @ 10:53 GMT
Hi Charles,

you make a very good point that things may be worse than they appear to those living relatively insulated lives.

You have shared lots of ideas of what needs to be done in your opinion and also raised some questions to think about. Don't agree with all of the suggestions but that's OK, in the spirit of brainstorming. No physics, but you have answered the essay question. I hope you get more readers. Kind Regards, Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on May. 3, 2014 @ 15:43 GMT
Dear Charles,

As the developments in Observational Science is foundational for all other scientific developments, it is also primary for implicating environmental regulations with Humanity.

With best wishes,

Jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on May. 3, 2014 @ 22:54 GMT
Dear Charles Gregory St Pierre,

You've obviously put a lot of thought into these issues, and while your recommendations are, on the whole, rather strong, you qualify the problem by insisting on "impartial evaluation". I'm not sure impartial evaluation exists or as possible. The Club of Rome in the 70s scared me for a while, but the first computer simulations of the world were obviously not up to the task. Not sure that's changed.

My hope and belief is that the problem is not bad enough to require the strong medicine that you recommend, because my fear is that your solution is far more ideal than is possible. You expect a level of selfless rationality that is hard to envision for one of my years.

Key is that, as you note, while you argue for urgency, there may be grounds for complacency. If there is not, your approach seems ideal (probably too ideal for reality). If you had merely stated that the problem IS urgent and we MUST follow your plan, I would oppose you on principle. But you say IF the problem is urgent, here is a good plan, for that I commend you.

So my belief is that the actual determination of the current state and projected future state is almost impossible. And were it to be possible, I suspect the implementation of your plan would be far harsher than your well thought out vision. Yours is a top-down solution requiring more of our institutions of higher learning end of our leaders then they may be capable of. My approach tends to be more bottom-up.

Here's hoping it's not as urgent as it may seem,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 4, 2014 @ 04:14 GMT
Dear Eugene,

Thank you for reading my essay.

I also hope it is not as urgent as it seems. However, we are dealing with a non-linear system, which needs to be better understood. The problem with extractive industries such as mining, farming and fishing, is that we come to rely on their production when they are at their peak, and are ill prepared for the relatively rapid decline that comes, often soon, afterward. While it is an exaggeration to say that they never caught so many Atlantic cod as the year before the fishery collapsed, it is not much of one. They did have warning, but they also had overcapitalization, and what can only be called a need to overfish. Each fisherman had so much capital invested, and the only way to recoup it was to fish, as much as he could, or was allowed. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_fisheries

Socially, the very wealthy have a need to accumulate capital. They exploit the rest of us just like a fishery.

Similarly, we have a need to drive the planet into global warming. It reminds me of a game reputed to have been played on the tops of domed water towers in the Midwest. You crawl out onto the slope of the dome. You can go down the slope of the dome so far, and come back. Further, and you start accelerating.

We can only go down these slopes so far. I believe that it is urgent that we stop. If we go far enough, we start accelerating. But then it will be too late.

Charles Gregory St. Pierre

Bookmark and Share



James Dunn wrote on May. 4, 2014 @ 01:51 GMT
Charles,

I think there are many more parts to the future of humanity than a few people's interests can legitimately consider. For instance: I am profoundly against the further corruption of eco-systems (unethical allocation of resources and/or opportunities). The people and other species involved deserves broad considerations. Is it ethical to transport a miriad of species of microbes...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Charles Gregory St Pierre wrote on May. 4, 2014 @ 04:20 GMT
Dear James

Thank you for reading my essay, and your lengthy comment.

I consider a business-based research society unlikely to consider the fundamental questions you suggest, as any payoff is simply too distant and problematic. I believe it is the business of government to pursue such issues, as government should have a lower discount rate. Representative of the whole society, and therefore interested in its entire survival, government must place a higher value on the future than a business, or consortium of businesses, would, and therefore must palace a higher value on more distant payoffs.

Leadership is necessary but not sufficient, as I argue. The people must be engaged for most effective response. Yet, nations, and even institutions, must be prepared to 'go it alone,' if they are unable to recruit the support of others, leading by example or, if not leading, preparing on their own.

Doing nothing sends the message that nothing need be done.



Charles Gregory St Pierre

Bookmark and Share



John Brodix Merryman wrote on May. 4, 2014 @ 22:07 GMT
Charles,

You cast a pretty large net over the situation, but I think we need to go for the jugular.

The fallacy of capitalism is that money is a contract which we treat as a commodity. A debt is a promise, a contract. Everyone, rich and poor alike, want to accumulate as much as possible, so there is overwhelming pressure to create as much notational value as possible. The problem...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 5, 2014 @ 06:22 GMT
Dear John,

Thank you for reading my essay, and your comment.

In order for the public, on net, to save, the government must run a deficit, or print money. Currently, most of this money is going to the wealthy, since most of the public has been unable to save, due to rising living costs and stagnant wages. They are being repressed by the oligarchy, financially.

An entire society cannot save money. It is a fallacy of composition. It is contractionary in the present, as society saves, and inflationary when the society dis-saves. (Does this affect production? An interesting question.) The point being that money is indeed not a commodity. As the MMT-ers argue, it is just keeping score.

Raising the interest rate is, I think, mostly useful for slowing the velocity of money. But, since money is debt, it also affects the quantity.

I think the only way for a community to gain control of its resources, and its money, is through a strongly progressive tax system. This will discourage excess accumulations of capital, and also help conserve resources, since it decreases the discount rate of those resources. That is, future resources have a higher present value. Someone who owned some forest, for instance, with a flat tax might have it clearcut, taking all the income at once, whereas, with a progressive tax, he would be more likely to just cut a portion of it, and save the rest for income later.



This to be combined with a modest rate of inflation.

You have given me something to think about. Thank you.

Charles Gregory St Pierre

Bookmark and Share


John Brodix Merryman replied on May. 5, 2014 @ 16:38 GMT
Charles,

My issue with more progressive taxation as a solution, is that it only directs the flow of wealth from this financial vacuum, rather than slowing the rate of destruction of that which it consumes, in order to create that flow of notational value.

If that person with the forest didn't have a highly leveraged and speculative financial system in which he might derive some definite profit from the money earned from cutting those trees, he would be far more inclined to leave them as a store of value in themselves and only cut what would bring in the money for which he immediately needed.

That's why I focus on treating this 'scorekeeping' as a contract, which has deep civil and sociological import. A contract is an agreement which requires both sides to cooperate as the essential purpose is to solidify a cooperative function, not a predatory one. Ultimately the bankers will find they cooked their own golden goose.

Even a puppet pulls back on its strings, giving meaning and focus to the puppeteer.

Regards,

John

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Denis Frith wrote on May. 6, 2014 @ 05:00 GMT
Charles

You deal with how humanity can steer the future of society by dealing with the rational decisions that people can make. You do take into account the technological systems that enable them to implement these policies. You mention renewable resources when most of the physical resources, such as oil, are not renewable. If humanist is to steer the future, is must decide how to cope with the inevitable aging of the vast amount of technological infrastructure that provides the goods and services that society has become so dependent on using.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 6, 2014 @ 05:16 GMT
Dear Denis,

Yes. Unfortunately humanity is mal-invested in its future. Highly capitalized (developed) nations are dependent on apparently cheap non-renewables, (esp. the US, with urban sprawl, etc.) and this will require large amounts of re-capitalization to overcome. It may be that much of our present infrastructure should be let go. The biological sciences are woefully under invested in, and biological resources foolishly over-exploited.

Like any junkie, humanity must be broken of its pathological dependencies. This does not mean we cannot live well. It does mean we must live within our means.

Thanks for reading my essay.

Charles Gregory St Pierre

Bookmark and Share



Thomas Howard Ray wrote on May. 6, 2014 @ 12:03 GMT
Charles,

From one vagabond intellectual to another:

Right on, brother. Thomas Paine couldn't have said it any better.

" ... we will argue below that for any nation to most effectively deal with the future, ( and the future must be faced with the institutions we have,) it must eventually engage the majority of its population."

Early in this century, I was highly disturbed by the rationalization that SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld used to justify our deficiency of military readiness, in answering the question of a rank and file soldier:

"Army Spc. Thomas Wilson: Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles? And why don't we have those resources readily available to us?

Rumsfeld: It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it. As you know, ah, you go to war with the army you have---not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.---You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up..."

Few non-officers who have ever actually been to war (I am a Vietnam veteran) look at this astounding statement as anything but stupefyingly uninformed, and opposed to sound tactical wisdom.

In the course of your essay, you expand and clarify the above statement, that we need to marshal our resources as well as the will of the people, before we try and take the hill.

Great essay, and best wishes in the competition.

Best,

Tom

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 7, 2014 @ 03:30 GMT
Dear Tom,

Thanks for reading my essay, and thanks for the encouragement.

Good luck in the competition.

Charles

Bookmark and Share


Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 7, 2014 @ 04:04 GMT
Dear Tom,

I'm afraid the military-industrial complex is more interested in profit than preparedness, as we have, and will learn, to our sorrow.

Indeed, the inefficiency of the military is a feature, not a bug, as it widens the scope for profit. The military cannot account for many of the billions of dollars it spends. That this compromises our position in the world, (and I include the US's moral standing,) is not the concern of the corporations which are instrumental in, and profit from, our decline.

Charles

Bookmark and Share


Thomas Howard Ray replied on May. 7, 2014 @ 22:59 GMT
Charles,

It's a bummer, isn't it? I think. though, that even if the offenders manage to survive the Inspector General, they'll not be able to survive a distributed system. There will be no place left for centralized massive funding so attractive to those with larceny in their hearts, and no need to have one. The system is self limiting.

Best,

Tom

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on May. 6, 2014 @ 15:49 GMT
Hi Charles,

In my essay I refer to the famous last will of a highly respected consequent critical personality. He didn't spend life Life "in self discovery and other dissolute intellectual pursuits". My dictionary tells me:"Someone who is dissolute does not care at all about moral and lives in a way that is considered to be wicked and immoral; used showing disapproval".

Well, as I tried to explain in my essay, the traditional moral needs some correction. I merely doubt that your essay provides a more careful analysis than e.g. Alan Kadin's.

Already your abstract begun with the perspective of humanity in the sense of mankind and jumped to the national perspective.

I would like to know how do you intend steering your own life, what size of world population will be best, and how to overcome resistance against reduction of birth rate? While I didn't yet read your essay, I guess it does not answer these three questions.

I wish you a lucky life.

Eckard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 7, 2014 @ 03:49 GMT
Dear Eckard,

You really should read my essay.

Thanks for the wish.

Sincerely,

Charles Gregory St Pierre

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on May. 7, 2014 @ 14:30 GMT
Dear Charles Gregory St Pierre,

Your essay was very interesting and the ideas you expressed about the steering of our future seemed quite sound to me. I do hope that your essay does well in the competition.

Regards,

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 8, 2014 @ 01:17 GMT
Dear Joe,

Thanks Joe.

Best of luck to your essay, also.

Regards,

Charles Gregory St Pierre

Bookmark and Share



Margriet Anne O'Regan wrote on May. 10, 2014 @ 22:43 GMT
Hello Charles - I really like where you say "The nation's ruling oligarchy and vested interests must be converted and involved, as they will otherwise oppose change, even that necessary for society's survival." Big job but totally necessary !!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 16, 2014 @ 05:27 GMT
Charles,

I believe you assess correctly the state the Earth is in. The latest news of melting in Antarctica has spurred the claim of doing nothing because it's too late. My view is "look beyond" the solar system and conventional theory and "look within" the greatest resource, the brain, a microcosm of the universe.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michael muteru wrote on May. 16, 2014 @ 13:08 GMT
hi charles

Fantastic just hit the bulls eye.I too address such challenges and provide feasible solutions in my essay here- http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2101.titled LIVING IN THE SHADOWS OF THE SUN: REALITIES, PERILS ESCAPADES MAN, PLANET AND KARDASHEV SCALE.MAKING THE GREAT TRANSITION by Michael muteru.Kindly take your time to rate/review it .Thanks.All the best

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 17, 2014 @ 08:15 GMT
Dear Michael,

Thank you for reading my essay.

I read your essay with a great deal of interest.

You are right. We must increase our use of biological and renewable energy sources, and reduce/reverse or population growth rate.

The difficulty is getting everyone on the same page for a global climate blueprint.

Best of luck in the competition.

Charles

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on May. 16, 2014 @ 19:13 GMT
Charles,

Great essay. I agree we're 'sleep walking' into problems, and when awake we don our blinkers and also look the wrong way just in case. Extra credit just for pointing that out! I don't agree with your position in the fours anyway. I also subtly argue and hope I show;

"In terms of human capital, the developing science of the mind is paramount." Judy Nabb also agrees. Eugenics is worse then useless if we develop only more physically perfect fools.

I also baled out of indoctrination before it was too late, though continued studying for 10yrs (plus 40 part time). I've earned well from renewables, but have found in research that far better sources are hiding right under our noses once we learn how to see them by understanding nature. So does anybody listen, or even review the foundational new thinking required? Hmm. ...As you say;

"society pursues its courses of individual and collective short-sightedness, almost certainly in (mostly) wrong directions."

I hope you may read mine, which should be sensational. Only to a few it seems, and nobody with doctrine embedded. If you ever suspected QM had a simple(ish) classical analogue and should be unifiable with QM, you were right. Do tell me if you follow it (my prev essays set the dynamic framework). ..Going up.

Very best of luck in the contest.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 17, 2014 @ 06:59 GMT
Dear Peter,

Thank you for kind words. And your vote.

I read your qualifications and you seem to be doing quite well. And your essay shows you're up on your physics.

I'm afraid my life is a comparative mess. My learning is broad but my tools are dull. My only real accomplishments seem to be internal. I am pretty happy with my state of mind, delusional as it may be. Though of course there is plenty of room for improvement, (like brushing up on my math, eh?)

Lately I've been concentrating on economic and social issues, and am more alarmed than Piketty about the effects of increasing inequality, not only on humanity's progress but even on man's ability to respond in a timely manner to real world crises. I think much social paralysis is the result of inequality, and the actions of the wealthy to preserve their position, no matter what.

Best of luck in the competition,

Charles

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on May. 19, 2014 @ 15:52 GMT
Charles,

Thanks, including for you comments on mine. I responded viz;

~

"Thanks Charles,

I think you've highlighted the problem with mainstream theory. Though clearly very inconsistent and incomplete it's embedded, so recognising more consistent alternatives which are 'different' (be definition) is impossible.

All are trying to get their heads and maths around reality in terms of twisted mobius strips and 7-spheres, but when shown that the simple relationship between orbital speeds at different latitudes on a sphere can reproduce everything needed to explain "QM predictions", it's so unbelievably simple that it's simply not believed so not even analysed!

I stress I'm not shocked or upset Charles. I estimated in 2010 that mankind was unlikely to have the vision to perceive the truth of any such 'different' solution until 2020 (see my 2011 Essay). The subsequent essays have shown the proofs, being exceptionally well supported, (2nd Community last year) but translating that to a paradigm shift is a long way off it seems.

I do hope you might look back to better understand to logic and quite solid evidence (see also me recent comments here) which will help you better understand my classical solution here, also how QM and SR are indeed marriageable once the interpretations of both are just slightly modified by the same mechanism; electron/plasma re-scattering at the electrons own 'c'. I call it 'joined-up-science', a bit like learning 'joined-up-writing as it invokes well known effects from disparate 'disciplines'."

~

Best wishes.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Israel Perez wrote on May. 21, 2014 @ 22:54 GMT
Dear Charles

Very nice and well written essay. You discuss many hot topics that are important to address. I agree that we should work together for the future generations. But I think it is difficult to negotiate with the interests of countries, they are still competing for hegemony and supremacy and it seems that's more important for them.

I think you will be interested in reading my essay which deals with similar topics to yours.

Good luck!

Best Regards

Israel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Charles Gregory St Pierre replied on May. 28, 2014 @ 03:55 GMT
Dear Israel,

Thanks for reading my essay. I'm glad you liked it, and I will read yours with interest.

Charles

Bookmark and Share



Toby Asher Lightheart wrote on Jun. 4, 2014 @ 07:35 GMT
Hi Charles,

You've conveyed many important issues that humanity faces concise and clearly in your essay. Is there anything in particular you would like to discuss or would like feedback on?

Cheers,

Toby

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Luca Valeri wrote on Jun. 6, 2014 @ 23:28 GMT
Hi Charles

Great Essay. I agree in every point. I think you made a realistic evaluation of the condition.

I will comment more in detail when I'm home again. For now highest score bevor the contest finishes.

Regards

Luca

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Darius M wrote on Jun. 22, 2014 @ 09:51 GMT
Humanity should live according to the laws of the Universe.

https://www.academia.edu/7347240/Our_Cognitive_Fram
ework_as_Quantum_Computer_Leibnizs_Theory_of_Monads_under_Ka
nts_Epistemology_and_Hegelian_Dialectic

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


sasa diana sasa wrote on Apr. 25, 2017 @ 01:30 GMT
OBAT MAAG adalah obat yang paling manjur untuk mengobati stroke.OBAT MAAG herbal sekarang mulai dilirik lagi oleh masyarakat, karena OBAT MAAG herbal tidak memiliki efek samping yang berbahaya bagi tubuh. OBAT MAAG yang terbuat dari herbal mempunyai banyak manfaat, yaitu OBAT MAAG herbal sangat ampuh, OBAT MAAG herbal aman mengatasi stroke, OBAT MAAG tradisional bisa dikonsumsi oleh semua kalangan usia. itulah sebabnya OBAT MAAG herbal mulai dilirik lagi oleh masyarakat, karena OBAT MAAG herbal sudah terbukti ampuh OBAT MAAG herbal mulai dilirik lagi oleh masyarakat, karena OBAT MAAG herbal sudah terbukti ampuh mengatasi

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


edu birdie wrote on Dec. 5, 2018 @ 09:49 GMT
It' actually a great and helpful piece of information. I am glad that you shared this helpful information with us. Please stay us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing. excel assignment help

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


edu birdie wrote on Dec. 5, 2018 @ 09:50 GMT
excel assignment help

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ice111 acea wrote on Oct. 1, 2019 @ 08:40 GMT
Something concerning these tools is that they are very accurate. This is the case even if you have a brand new container installed. They are stated to be 97% accurate. You can always make changes to get optimum output. Guarantee you start from a reduced degree as you make your modifications. https://bit.ly/2lQT25p

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.