Who's in the mood for a debate?

im gonna say it was necessary, because whenever you have something good happen its always reciprocated by negative effects because thats just how things work. usually when talking about stuff like that you dont get a double positive or negative, it just equalizes out..

well, both sides are arguable...the industrial revolution was essential for the development of the economy of the world, but when you think about it, why did the economy of the world need to develop? My view is that society has always been greedy and wanting more. There would have been no issues, such as the effects of the industrial revolution, if people had been content with what they had. But men felt the need to acquire power and status by ruling over others. This eventually led to the need to gain wealth, which was most efficiently done through the progress of the industrial revolution......I guess my real point is:
WHO SAYS PROGRESS IS NECESSARY???

well no one says progress is necessary persay, its mostly kind of an arbitrary thing. but theres lots of arbiters out there who mess with it. see, as long as there are men, there will be progress and destruction, because like i said earlier, everything finds a way to reciprocate itself. but these events are as natural as the flow of time.

personally however, i feel progress is for the positive, if it werent for progression, we wouldnt be educated, we wouldnt have fine art, and in a way cease to exist. because progress like i said is natural, organisms in their environments evolve, sometimes through natural selection, so if everything around us, except for oursleves is growing and progressing, we'll find ourselves screwed one day. kinda like planet of the apes or something.

well said. that kinda goes with what i was saying about events reciprocating themselves. thats because all naturally occuring things have balance.

yeah everyone left cuz i won! haha jk jk, these debates are fun though, i love em.

OH NO!!! this debate is NOT over...
Yes, progress is human nature. I never said that it wasn't. I did say however that progress is not necessary for our survival. How would the human race die off if we owned a specific section of land and everyone was satisfied with what they had? If we did that, people would care more for their own land and we would not have nearly as many endangered and threatened species. So many people believe that the world exists for their pleasure and nothing else. You and I know that this is untrue and such mentalities should be eradicated if the world is to remain habitable for future generations....
how 'bout that!

Hope y'all don't mind if I enter a little late...
No, progress isn't NECESSARY, but it happens, doesn't it? And many times it helps. How did we find out about cures for diseases or the best way to plant barley?
Yes, it's true that the world isn't just for humans and capitalizing. But it happened. Now, it's a little...optimistic I guess (that or my argument is pessimistic), to say that we could convince the rest of the world that it progress isn't necessary. The way that human kind works, it would be very hard to say "enough! Can't we be happy just with what we have?" There's a whole sphere of unfairness if we were to make the world put down their armor (not just in the literal sense) and tell it to be happy. The people in Africa would still starve as the rich would still get their caviar every day (of course, an overgeneralization, but you get my point).
If we really want to make it so that people see the world as a place not just for making money, we start over. But that can't really happen, so vote for progress for those people who want to make the world better and don't see the world as just a piece of land to get money from.