Poll: 7 billion people, one opinion.

[RatRace123]

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.

 

[LilithSlave]

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.

The only way something like this could possibly be good at all, is if fusing people's minds like that meant that the best viewpoints somehow lived and the bad ones somehow died.

It's a naturally horrifying idea already in a lot of ways. But in a way it's also just what we do on forums and things on a much larger scale. I personally believe in my opinions enough to put them to the test and fuse them with the rest of the world, though I wouldn't want to do it everyone in the world at the same time. One person at a time, yes. Everyone at once, I'm a lot more hesitant.

Why? Sure, my brain is my own. But an opinion that can't withstand someone else's brain being pressed upon it isn't worth having.

 

[zajohnson]

There needs to be different opinions, because humans are imperfect. Only by working together do we reach our goals.
Man, that was cheezy.

 

[Cakes]

So we'd be the Borg? That would rock.

 

[FilipJPhry]

Mark 5:9 "My name is Legion. For we are many." If that were to happen, we'd be like the Cylon, solve problems in mere seconds, be able to travel through space, better tech, no violence. But, no. No individuality means no fun, unless there was the time of the day where everyone had fun time. But then again, that would make life too predictable. I'd predict a mass suicide would be inevitable from all the boredom. But, that would require a vote, via telepathy or something.

Too much stuff to think on this. Gonna go sleep.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I will take all the problems in the world over losing individuality for everyone.

 

[emeraldrafael]

no, cause then that leads to stagnation and no further development. while maybe not EVERYONE thought the earth was flata nd you would sail straight off the edge if you went to far, most people did, or at the very least few people were vocal enough to ***** about it despite the crazy label getting stamped down.

So no. progress means difference, just as evolution means change. if you halt that difference/change, you halt the entire process and basically just fuck up the pudding.

and ebfore you say that thats not true and we would all work to better the world technologically, just remember this.

We used to think that for the common cold, the best thing to do was go into a frigid dirty pond and have blood sucking leeches just latch on. and that the best way to deal with infection was to leave it alone or just cut off your body part. or that if you werent white/European you were an object.

today, we have things like penicillin, antibodies, and freedom (or relative freedom as to comparison to what it was back then in the more developed nations).

...

Plus theres the ethical questions like "what happens if someone thinks differently (do you kill them cause they may cause trouble, banish them to near certain death, or just leave them alone and everyone thinks they're mad)", "what thoughts are the ones that will be chosen as right (capitalism or communism, the racist vs the non racist, religion vs non religion, which religion in general is right, equal rights for all vs fuck em they're not like me, do we raise the retard/lame/disfigured/challenged or should we just spartan that shit and leave them for the wolves)", "is life really worth living if there is no difference or uniqueness (if my opinion is the same as everyone else, would I even know I exist, and could I say it was a good life when it was a life chosen for me)"

it also leads to the question of why you would need everyone. theres no change, so everoyne is basically the same person, just in a different physical body. So in the end would it really matter if there was 7 billion of us or just one?

 

[Layz92]

How boring would that be? Conflict and variety is the point of life. If everyone had the same ideas then there would be no original art, no sport, no new games, one type of food etc. I would rather hurl myself off a bridge than live in that lifestyle.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

So we'd be the Borg? That would rock.

Your post and your avatar got me thinking of a world where the borg all look like Jim.

...

The hilarity!

OT: I'd rather be able to be different, thank you very much. I'm no hipster but I don't want to submit to any global mindmeldthingamagiger.

 

[GWarface]

So you basicly want us all connected to a global hive-mind?

Yeah, no thanks.. And i shouldnt really have to explain why..

I dont know what is more scary; that you actually considered it a good idea or that it actually is possible..

 

[RatRace123]

So you basicly want us all connected to a global hive-mind?

Yeah, no thanks.. And i shouldnt really have to explain why..

I dont know what is more scary; that you actually considered it a good idea or that it actually is possible..

Never said it was a good idea, I think it'd suck too, different perspective is an important part of the human experience. I just didn't give my feelings on the topic in the first post 'cause I felt it would steer the general feeling of the discussion. Though most seem to agree that it would be a terrible idea.
That's the answer I was looking for to be honest, didn't expect so many people to get mass brainwashing conspiracies out of it though, I just said instant magical agreement spell.

 

[Nickompoop]

Hmm, an interesting conundrum. On one hand it erases all wars and violence. On the other, everyone loses their independence. Is it worth the price? No. Think of it this way: mass genocide is better than the mass brainwashing you propose.

 

[SquirePB]

I guess my answer would depend on in what way is it "better". I mean I'm sure there are some ways it would be better, but equally so for the opposite.

 

[SonicKoala]

Going off what others have said, I think this "hive mind" concept would be a terrible idea because there are very few scenarios where one single opinion is indisputably preferential or "better" than another opinion regarding the same idea. One popular example would be the on-going debate over the benefits of a market-based economy versus an economy regulated by the government. Taken on their own, neither of those ideas is going to be very beneficial to a nation's economic health. It is when we strike a fine balance between the two that things tend to operate more efficiently. In my experience, most discussions/debates are better settled if this "middle ground" can be found. If everyone on earth felt the same way about everything, there would be no "middle ground", and I can't see that working out very well in the end.

 

[Vault101]

hahahaha yeha sure thats great Idea

excuse me Im going to go join the chruch of unitology, what could possibly go wrong?

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

Where have I heard this before?
"WELLL SHIIIIIIIIIIITTT!"

OT: In short, no, as that would eliminate what makes us human, as this sounds like mass
brainwashing or slavery...

 

[Nikolaz72]

But how would we be able to play Multiplayer games?

 

[Kluge]

But how would we be able to play Multiplayer games?

Same way the AI plays against itself. You have a set of instructions to follow once conditions are met.

Though, since our perception and movement is imperfect, implementation of our instructions would be imperfect, too. So... I guess they may still be interesting... for a spectator... none of which would exist (well... that's not necessarily true - I guess there'd probably be conditions where someone would want to spectate). We'd essentially lose all self-awareness, but still have emotional responses based on hormonal responses and whatnot.


Idunno. The better question may be "would you rather exist as an ant?"