Vegetarians would like to see a world where no one eats meat. At least some feminists would like to see a world where men and women are essentially the same except for outward appearance. Conservatives think liberalism is wrong and vice versa.
Many people would like to stamp out capital punishment worldwide. Some people feel that everyone should be nice and politically correct at all times and never be angry or rude. Some people say that no one every should tell a lie; others think lying can be good sometimes. Some people think everyone should be (fill in the religion); on the other side are atheists like us.
Now, imagine a homogenized world. Everyone under the same laws. Believing the same things. Everyone having exactly the same rights and responsibilities. The same limitations and the same opportunities. And everyone's happy with it, including you.
Standing back from this world, would this be a good world or would there be something fundamentally flawed or wrong or dysfunctional with it?
Don't they create the same environment by passing out Quaaludes in mental institutions? If I'm not mistaken, that's what Randal P. McMurphy was rebelling against.
Standing back from this world
Sounds like a sort of meta-reality to me!
This reminds me of the Matrix, and the machine versions of a human utopia where everything was blissful and perfect were not accepted by humans. Only when they included our misery and suffering were they successfull in pacifying us.
To answer your question I also think it would be a bad thing for everyone to agree on everything. That being said I don't believe that is the world we are striving for in any manner. I think our utopia is to maximize personal liberty along with just being protected from one another. And wouldn't you know it, getting rid of religion would be a great place to start for achieving this. Throw in ending world hunger and we are just about there.
Me too, I was gonna post something similar. And hopefully we to rise above having to be protected at all. I can imagine it.
The bell-shaped curve suggests there will always be some from whom others need to be protected, sadly.
Unless we can shift the whole curve, or sharpen it up enough. Not holding my breath.
Well, I think a lot of us have a secret agenda. On the one hand, we want to honor diversity, but on the other hand we want other cultures to toe the line on various issues: rights issues, behavior issues, belief issues, etc.
Absolutely, except it's no secret. I know the kind of world I would more like to live in and I am working on it best I can. It would be more in line to my thinking on a few particular subjects (you can probably guess at least one) but no where near homogenous.
Basically, we want people in other cultures to wear their native costumes, cook their native foods, but otherwise to be pretty much liberal Americans underneath.
Yes, a homogenized world, where everyone is a steriotype, but only drink blue Bubble-up! Can I still have good ethnic currys?
Are 'getting rid of religion', and 'ending world hunger', related at some dependent level. Like 'Soylent Green'?