What if you could erase one aspect of mankind?

[4RM3D]

We all know the human race isn't perfect. We got our good sides and our bad sides. But what if you could erase one aspect (thing, part) of mankind, what would you erase?

I believe if you erase too much, you essentially stop being human or at least that what defines us. But if you just change one thing, we would still remain human, no? But be careful; erasing one bad thing, might make (other) things worse.

Erase fear or pain? No, we need those keep ourselves in check.
Erase hunger? Hmm, but that drives us to eat and in turn survive.
Erase disease? Science will do that for us, eventually, I suppose.
Erase anger? Yes, that would make things better. I would erase anger, I think.

What about you? Which one aspect of mankind would you change?

 

[BlazeRaider]

Disease/disorders. I don't wanna wait for science, I have hives and a cold now <_<
also, anger is an emotion we need to drive us to confront threats, without it we might turn into these guys [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SuicidalPacifism]. It's actually worrying to think what humans would be like without anger, there would probably still be cold and calculated reasons that lead to war, but the idea of wars being fought with no anger seems kinda unsettling.

 

[Aerosteam]

Erase all but one language. Preferably keep English.
By God that would solve so many problems... sucks for translators and foreign language teachers though.

 

[latiasracer]

Erase all but one language. Preferably keep English.
By God that would solve so many problems... sucks for translators and foreign language teachers though.

^This! A Very wise choice indeed!

Hmm, I'd probably remove the burning aspect we seem to have to make as many babies as possible... 1 Per family seems good. And hey, maybe people just won't want one. I know this happens now, but not as often as we need it to

 

[McMullen]

Mistrust and hostility towards those outside your existing social circle is one of those traits that has been made obsolete by modern communications technology, and causes serious problems in the modern world. That's what I'd get rid of.

 

[xPixelatedx]

The fact that we are Anthropocentric

God this world would be so much more nicer if we weren't so full of ourselves.

 

[FernandoV]

We all know the human race isn't perfect. We got our good sides and our bad sides. But what if you could erase one aspect (thing, part) of mankind, what would you erase?

I believe if you erase too much, you essentially stop being human or at least that what defines us. But if you just change one thing, we would still remain human, no? But be careful; erasing one bad thing, might make (other) things worse.

Erase fear or pain? No, we need those keep ourselves in check.
Erase hunger? Hmm, but that drives us to eat and in turn survive.
Erase disease? Science will do that for us, eventually, I suppose.
Erase anger? Yes, that would make things better. I would erase anger, I think.

What about you? Which one aspect of mankind would you change?

Lmfao, we still "need" hunger to drive us?

No, I choose hunger. Food could still exist for the sake of taste but it'd drive up the standard of living and just make the world a lot better.

 

[Nuuu]

Erase all but one language. Preferably keep English.
By God that would solve so many problems... sucks for translators and foreign language teachers though.

^This! A Very wise choice indeed!

Hmm, I'd probably remove the burning aspect we seem to have to make as many babies as possible... 1 Per family seems good. And hey, maybe people just won't want one. I know this happens now, but not as often as we need it to

One Baby per family would eventually kill the human race due to the slowly decreasing population. 1 girl and boy per family seems fair, as if you just kept it as general as two, there is a chance that you won't get an equal boy:girl ratio. Or just make it so they cant have more than 3 or 4, since i dont see the point in having more than that.

Disease and illness seems good, as that disease doesn't really do much besides kill and make us stronger against itself.

 

[babinro]

Erase possessions - this seems to work in Star Trek. I'd probably have a very tough time in this kind of world, but I suspect it would be for the better.

 

[Jodah]

I would get rid of willful ignorance. Not knowing everything is fine, I mean nobody knows everything. It is the people that don't WANT to know more than they do that should be beaten with a large trout.

 

[Trent Kama]

Greed. We'd definitely start seeing a change in how society works.

 

[Odbarc]

Erase all but one language. Preferably keep English.
By God that would solve so many problems... sucks for translators and foreign language teachers though.

To do this, you would also have to remove 'languages' like leet speak, slang and other forms of verbal communication.

 

[Graphic Muze]

Erase stupidity
/thread

 

[Chicago Ted]

The compulsion for people to force their beliefs onto others. Whether it be religion, politics, or whatever. That way people can live their lives with a lot less worry.

 

[RipRoaringWaterfowl]

We all know the human race isn't perfect. We got our good sides and our bad sides. But what if you could erase one aspect (thing, part) of mankind, what would you erase?

I believe if you erase too much, you essentially stop being human or at least that what defines us. But if you just change one thing, we would still remain human, no? But be careful; erasing one bad thing, might make (other) things worse.

Erase fear or pain? No, we need those keep ourselves in check.
Erase hunger? Hmm, but that drives us to eat and in turn survive.
Erase disease? Science will do that for us, eventually, I suppose.
Erase anger? Yes, that would make things better. I would erase anger, I think.

What about you? Which one aspect of mankind would you change?

Lmfao, we still "need" hunger to drive us?

No, I choose hunger. Food could still exist for the sake of taste but it'd drive up the standard of living and just make the world a lot better.

Hmmm...

Interesting, in that now we wont have the need to constantly farm vast tracts of land. (In order to feed all the people in the world with current farming techniques, we would need an amount of land roughly equal to the entire landmass of South America.) Global warming might not be as much of an issue, as there might be less demand for beef, leading to less propagation of cattle who now won't release so much methane. Much human suffering from starvation or wars over food and water may end.

Though, think... food being such an integral part of us so far, if there's no hunger, what then? Perhaps all the people living in developed nations used to fancy and good tasting foods would be willing to continue eating as they wish, preventing the breakup of farms. Profits would still be there.

You have put forward an interesting proposition.

And, to note, a destruction of hunger would mean no more need to eat, not that we stop feeling hungry when we need to eat. Good to clarify.

 

[SD-Fiend]

Erase the ability to breed. Slowly but surely we will all now go extinct due to no more people being added to the population.

...Why?

OT:i'd say our jealousy\envy if there was something the other guy had that you can't you'll just have to either work for it or let it go

 

[careful]

Erase all but one language. Preferably keep English.
By God that would solve so many problems... sucks for translators and foreign language teachers though.

wouldnt work. believe me i know the economical simplifications that would come with such a unification, but unfortunately thats not how langauge works. but is that something really truely desirable? with everyone speaking one langauge, there would be no linguistic diversity and for that to work you would have to forbid langauge change (the impetus for the development of distinct langauges). so everyone would have to speak the same set of finite words, with the same grammatical constraints, the same vocabulary, and no colloquail/idiomatic deviations. these would be necessary constraints for a uniform langauge to exist (think about it logically). i mean would you really wanna get ride of the rich linguistic diversity of humanity? theres a czech saying "the more langauges you speak the many more times a person you are". im sure that langauge bariers have in past instances resulted even in the death of individuals, but comparitive linguistics has yielded so much pragmatic and theoreitcal insight into multiple various domains of science, the economical gains with langauge unification are absolutely trivial in comparison. overall, there may be specific disadvantages with a polylinguistic world yes, just as there are disadvantages to be found in almost any set of circumstances, but overall multilingualism is something to be humanly proud of not to regret.