Poll: 7 billion people, one opinion.

[FernandoV]

No. You can't really move forward if everyone thinks the same thing.

I don't see that as part of his question. In terms of happiness, when people agree on something, and everyone is doing what is agreed is best, everyone is happy. Basic stuff. It doesn't matter if everyone just agreed to kill a puppy on the 3rd of every month.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

No, as scientific progress would be nonexistent. Science is based almost entirely on people standing up and saying "I believe you are incorrect, and I intend to prove it"; if we all agreed that the earth was flat, you'd be looking at pancake-shaped globes everywhere you went, because nobody would have had the presence of mind to say "bear with me, but I believe that idea may be mildly retarded". Sure, there's a lot of objectively stupid opinions in the world, and therefore a lot of baseless opposition to objectively good opinions and ideas, but the fact that we have such diversity allows us to have the range of good-to-bad in the first place; if we were all stuck in a monotone "mediocre", we wouldn't have any good ideas springing forth.

Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that we were all unanimously agreed on objectively good ideas, instead of being locked into a psychological dead-end. We all agree that science is good, that knowledge is power, killing is wrong, selflessness is admirable, honesty is golden, and sentimentality is never an excuse to hold up progress. What then? Call me crazy, but I still believe we wouldn't go anywhere, for the same reasons I previously went over. The evolution of a species is caused by favorable mutations replacing less-useful traits with superior ones, and in a world without such mutations, we'd all be single-celled organisms. The same principle applies to academia, as our pool of knowledge cannot be expanded without being able to tell right from wrong. Nowadays, it's common sense that an attempt to cure a fever by using leeches to remove a witch from an afflicted person's stomach is, y'know, fucking stupid, but there was a time where everybody was on board with that because that's the best we could do; if nobody between then and now said "that's fucking stupid" and set to work on research for cures that didn't make the affliction worse, you'd have a faceful of parasites every time you developed a sneeze. Even if we could all adjust our beliefs unanimously to accept a new piece of information, we'd be waiting for that information to fall out of the sky, because vast amounts of research and inquiry are primarily inspired by dissent.

Outliers for the win.

 

[Magicmad5511]

A positive would there would be no wars or conflict of any kind.
Negative. There would be absolutely no variety. No new expansions in marketing. I think f it happened I would kill myself out of sheer unrelenting, madness inducing boredom. Thing is though everyone else would have the same opinion so the human race would end.

 

[FalloutJack]

Here's an odd hypothetical:
We all have opinions on... mostly everything. We all bring a different perspective and view point to an argument. And sometimes we're very vicious about our opinions, to the point of violence in some cases.

So, my question is; what if through some mass wave of magic (just go with it) all of us had the same view point on every single topic that ever has or ever will come up?

Would the world be better if we all had the same idea about everything?

Discuss.

No, I'm afraid not. It would be the end of humanity as an intelligent species. The proof is in the pudding we call philosophy. This subject promotes the growth of ideas, the postulation of theories, and the creation of interesting lines of thought. It also points out the glaring fact that man does not know everything, and would cease to function if we did. Without something to drive us on in thought, we would merely exist...and then the stagnation would set in because we stop thinking. Before long, we're dead because there's nothing else to chase after.

The same can be said for sameness in thought because we would never really be thinking there, either. Maybe no arguments, but no discussions either. No innovation or originality, no difference of opinion to really make you wonder, no point in actually talking. We'd stagnate just as quickly.

 

[thylasos]

It rather depends what this inconceivable level of consensus is centred around, really.

 

[oooooooooooooooooooooooooo]

Depends really. If we all suddenly take to the opinion that we should beat each other's heads in with rocks, then probably not.

EDIT: What the guy above me said, but slightly more snarky

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I'm terrified, mainly because I know how much thoughtful and intelligent people are outnumbered by idiots.

We'd be back to the stone age in a week, clubbing each other to death with bricks for having red hair or moles. 'uhh - strange person...kill!'

 

[blaqknoise]

No. You can't really move forward if everyone thinks the same thing.

I don't see that as part of his question. In terms of happiness, when people agree on something, and everyone is doing what is agreed is best, everyone is happy. Basic stuff. It doesn't matter if everyone just agreed to kill a puppy on the 3rd of every month.

His question asked if the world would be better if we all thought the same way. He didn't ask anything about happiness.

 

[Thespian]

Seven billion people with the same opinion is just one person.

 

[SilentCom]

That's like the hive mind or something... If we all have the same opinion then creativity would be lost. Also, opinions can be wrong and lead to horrible outcomes and if everyone has that opinion, then everyone may be affected directly. Sort of like the "if everyone else is jumping off a bridge, would you"? scenario except the answer is yes.

Lastly, the whole notion of people having the same opinion wouldn't work unless we were all controlled by a hive mind or something because otherwise we would be experiencing different things, many of which would force us to take on opinions that others would not have even thought of.

 

[Kekkles]

To me, for something like that to happen, you'd need something to create that hivemind like a machine that would fuse our brains while our opinions duke it out until one comes out on topic. And who knows what trains of logic would cause all logic to die.

That sounds like it could be a movie. I'd say get a patent before WB takes that one down to the bank!

 

[wulfy42]

The world might be a better place depending on what the one opinion was. It's likely that such an entity (basically one creature with 7 billion parts) would realize it is too large to exist on this planet on a continuous basis and would reduce it's current population size and control it careful in the future (only so many new humans born until our population was much smaller). In a way if the entire human race was thinking about "itself" instead of ourselves, we would probably take better care of the planet...and each human (even if they are not individuals anymore).

With only one opinion the elderly, sick and unproductive humans would be eliminated (and they would all be fine with it...cause one opinion remember?). We as a race would probably stagnate and little to no innovation would occur (although scientific progression could in fact continue as experimentation would not stop working, nor would the drive for progress or the furthering of knowledge....in fact with such organization we would probably advance faster).

With the entire human race working together we could and probably would colonize other planets/moons in our solar system at least...and perhaps eventually find a way to expand throughout the universe. That is very unlikely to happen the way we are now.

We would not be individuals anymore though....so for the most part we would not exist as the beings we currently are....and neither would any of our children etc. We would be giving up a large part of what makes us human in a way.

Might be worth it anyway though.

 

[FernandoV]

No. You can't really move forward if everyone thinks the same thing.

I don't see that as part of his question. In terms of happiness, when people agree on something, and everyone is doing what is agreed is best, everyone is happy. Basic stuff. It doesn't matter if everyone just agreed to kill a puppy on the 3rd of every month.

His question asked if the world would be better if we all thought the same way. He didn't ask anything about happiness.

People progress out of the desire to make themselves happy. As far as I'm concerned, if stopping at the invention of fire meant everyone everywhere was happy forever then we won.

 

[Brandon237]

If anyone gained individuality for even a second they would probably commit suicide or take the ABSOLUTE strongest acid they could get their hands on. So that is a very big no.

 

[Blue2]

No. You can't really move forward if everyone thinks the same thing.

I don't see that as part of his question. In terms of happiness, when people agree on something, and everyone is doing what is agreed is best, everyone is happy. Basic stuff. It doesn't matter if everyone just agreed to kill a puppy on the 3rd of every month.

His question asked if the world would be better if we all thought the same way. He didn't ask anything about happiness.

People progress out of the desire to make themselves happy. As far as I'm concerned, if stopping at the invention of fire meant everyone everywhere was happy forever then we won.

I must agree with blaqknoise, do you remember during the dark ages where all (or most) think alike by the christian religion. Any new ideas or technology would be rejected by the millions and called "devil work". Even though the millions of people were happy back then, We could have found a cure for aids or cancer by now.

 

[FernandoV]

No. You can't really move forward if everyone thinks the same thing.

I don't see that as part of his question. In terms of happiness, when people agree on something, and everyone is doing what is agreed is best, everyone is happy. Basic stuff. It doesn't matter if everyone just agreed to kill a puppy on the 3rd of every month.

His question asked if the world would be better if we all thought the same way. He didn't ask anything about happiness.

People progress out of the desire to make themselves happy. As far as I'm concerned, if stopping at the invention of fire meant everyone everywhere was happy forever then we won.

I must agree with blaqknoise, do you remember during the dark ages where all (or most) think alike by the christian religion. Any new ideas or technology would be rejected by the millions and called "devil work". Even though the millions of people were happy back then, We could have found a cure for aids or cancer by now.

No I don't remember because I wasn't alive then but I am aware of the situation at that time. Trust when I say people were definitely not happy, Christianity only allowed them to tolerate their terrible situation. If everyone was happy with the same situation then there would be no need for progress. Why is there a need for cures? Because people hate cancer. If everyone was cool with cancer then who cares about progress?

 

[VladG]

Well, for one, if that were the case, we'd still be living in caves