Quote Originally Posted by Ramil View Post
Your opinions are subjective since we don't know such details about common folk that lived 1000 years ago, but from the records that have survived the time I see that human nature didn't change all that much and neither did their motives. Good old seven deadly sins still rule the world and they will be in 1000 years methinks. This won't leave much room for romantics.
Ah, now I see what you meant as I was talking about something completely different. As an example, take yourself, me, and Hanna. What would all of us be most likely doing back then? Perhaps 90% of chance - we'd be peasants and produce food. Not much room for anything else. What we call today 'culture' existed only for the aristocrats. All the interests and honour belonged to them. But look, nowdays we all talk about the stars, the ecology, the justice, the brainwashing, and what not. That's objective.

Quote Originally Posted by Ramil View Post
But then we wouldn't have called them 'breakthroughs'
But they still happen and the society should be mentally ready to accept those things.

Quote Originally Posted by Ramil View Post
don't you think it's a classic example of mutually-exclusive paragraphs (TM) ? You don't believe in humankind any more than I do, do you?
Yes, I probably didn't express myself correctly. It's not about the belief in the humankind, it's more like a belief in the technological advancement and the desire for the comfort in a good and responsible sense. Consider the less advantaged 'poor countries'. Can you make a list of 10 items you think prevent them from living the quality of life comparable to the Western democracies? (Please, do not include items similar to 'The US exploits those countries unfairly and keeps them poor intentionally' kind of anti-globalist crap. Thanks in advance. )