(Letter from reader on August 27th, 2008)
How are you, Mr. Hu?
I had suspected there was a printing mistake in the book before. I wanted to remind you earlier, but I was not sure at that time. After I compared it with the content on your website, I am sure there is a mistaken Chinese character on page 61 of ".(Then)" the closest globular cluster away from us is M4, but the content on your net is "((whereas) the closest globular cluster away from us is M4,)", which is maybe the type of mistake of five-stroke inputting. Please try to revise in the second edition…
There is another mistake on page 25 in, "(Middle and late 1000 centuries BC)", which may be a sentence that I have never seen before or I feel it is not readable, and I am not sure whether it is right or not. Therefore, I just inquire about it…
I am still speculative of the impression after reading about this book. Because this problem is important and big and the thought of your book is very meticulous, I will re-examine, abandon some previous opinions of mine and think based on your thought again and propose my questions etc.
Because of time, I don't have much time to think every day. So the progress of thinking is very slow, while due to the sedimentation of time, it is good for me to re-examine my previous questions. After sedimentation, I will examine from another angle! I will send in the following.
My impression after reading is the following; I will mention how to form the point of view about the problem of human survival, how to transfer to thinking based on your thoughts and mention some viewpoints of mine based on the content of this book! But you shall notice one point, and that is that I am just a student who hasn't graduated from junior school yet and am in my twenties. The problems proposed may offend you, so please understand.
(Letter from reader on December 1st, 2008)
My impression after reading the book
Thank you for sending me the rarest and precious book since the beginning human society! And the book that will influence generations! The feeling of reading your book, about your thoughts, I use "Heart gallops in the universe, thought lasts forever" to appreciate. (Of course, my appreciation is not purely chinchin, but say the recognition in my heart about your thought; besides appreciation, I also propose some questions about the problems in the book, I think is contradictory ).Your heart is galloping in the vast universe, you are researching and studying the supreme truth that saves humanity standing at the unprecedented height, analyzing a series of vital problems that humans will face with the eye view of radiation that penetrates universal space. You are thinking about the plan that humans can live in the universe safely and happily forever and considering the important and big subject that every significance is based on humans' existence for human. Such words are not complements, not even flattery, because we don't have common interests between us; the only thing that we have is the resonance of our thoughts and consensus in height! (I am sorry I am making friends with you!) I show my high admiration toward your thoughts and spirits!
While the general planner of the book is exclaiming that there is a Chinese scholar who explores and studies human problems, I am exclaiming that there is a person who can direct the direction of moving forward for humans finally among humanity! I feel the significance about this is deeply and comparatively great! This is a matter of happiness of all humanity, without consciousness of national boundaries. Through this book, I realize that I am one marvelous member among humans! Human society walks to today, I think it is inevitable that such a person appears! Who can really think about the problem of human itself fundamentally, macroscopically, microscopically and objectively from ancient to modern?
As you said, we are not pursuing everything sedulously! Everything is for the purpose of a human to survive from generation to generation and continue to exist on the earth and in the universe better! Such thoughts displayed in this rare and precious book are not enough to evaluate! I only have a macroscopic and general understanding about the aspect of human history, no microscopic and detailed deep understanding! But I know the thinkers before who thought about human problems in human society were after their own ideal society sedulously and that their thoughts were limited by times and cognitive range etc., which certainly doesn't deny their thoughts. The range explored in this book considers problems of humanity from the basic scale standing to the unprecedented height and depth and overall new aspect.
After I read the book, I read selectively several key and important chapters again. I read very slowly because I don't have time when I am working; I just read a little at night, but I think it over when I am free in the day time. When I read, I also think over some problems in the book again and again as well as examine some viewpoints formed before and some content of dialogues sent to you before; through the cognition about the book, I have my own new conception and know and understand some questions that I didn't before, and realize it in my thoughts more deeply! Seen from now, some of my previous ideas and guiding ideology are generally in common! What is insufficient is that the questions I realized are not as deep as yours, thus there is a little difference. My ideas are at the enlightening stage; in addition, my own conditions also prohibit me from knowing more aspects of questions and developing forward to a higher level. Therefore, if I go on exploring the questions in this aspect, I can stand at a brand new starting point which is based on the content of this book as a guiding ideology. By examining my previous ideas, I abandon some, keep some and take your thoughts mainly!
To tell you the truth, I didn't finish reading . I thought you would put all the contents on your website, so I didn't buy the book (because of my personal factor at that time as well) at that time, I just had an old computer to use, so I thought I could read it on the internet; later I found that there was only half on the internet. When I wanted to buy it, the book was sold out, and thus I can only read the content on your website. Until you send me the book, I cannot understand your thoughts and know your ideas as thoroughly…
After reading the book, I know and understand your ideas deeply; I feel the thought of the book is very meticulous! It is hard to pick out more problems in speculations with my level! But I feel I still have a little theorization on the subjective aspect of some questions! Of course, I also mention some personal subjective questions! However, here, I need to declare something before I propose my questions:
It is a little difficult for me to read this book because I have not graduated from junior school yet and am in my twenties. Although I have learned some knowledge involved in this book by myself during my spare time, I haven't thought about some questions! Some ideas I propose may have a lot of insufficiencies, etc. Please understand! When I speculate some hard problems, I feel I almost go bananas once problems collide with each other. The degree of fighting by themselves of thought is really like "a large war", at this time. I have to stop suspecting and look for something amusing to reduce the high spiritual press brought by speculation; my brain is not enough to be used! It surpasses my actual level a little. Sometimes I feel I almost understand the problem, but not all of it. Even so, I have still set up some questions, though they are not systematic, but they are in pieces; the questions that I propose may be not objective and practical enough. I can't set up too many questions because I have only known about the book in such a short time. In the future, I will continue to speculate on the content of this book. A longer time will help to me to realize the questions more thoroughly and objectively. With my level, I can't find out many problems in a short time because the book is very meticulous!
In order to strengthen mutual understanding between us, I introduce how my cognition about human problem forms and my attitude of treating human problems on the life attitude.
The focus and formation of my thoughts about human problem is not easy. It is also the inevitable result of my experiences in life. I fail at every aspect in life, which makes me form such thoughts; Failure in life makes me have time to contact and learn much knowledge in this aspect on internet and TV. Then I have a little thought, and then I understand and know the knowledge about the universe, human history, natural science, philosophy and national religion, politics and military etc. on purpose; after I know more about these truths, I begin thinking about the problem of whether human exist or not more deeply. Humans are minor when facing universe, but the significance is comparatively big! Will humans be extinguished or not? When? Is the threat from universe to human? What is the direction of human? How do we prohibit extinction? Etc. A series of questions form in my brain. This series of cognition touches me to consider the significance of humans and the problem of humanity itself, deeply circling the suspicion of whether humans exist or not! While I am considering writing a poem and asking a "funny question", are you still impressed or not? In the first email that I sent to you (time flies all the time, it is hard for human beings to live more than 100 years, ancient tree are green for thousands of years, do humans exist or not?), this paragraph is the inspiring question when I am considering the problem of humanity.
After I had some cognition about human problem, I formed two key points of my own which were sent to you before (problem of human itself - existence, ultimate focus of human-universe). I cognated the problem of the existing crisis of humanity because I understand the universe environment is threatening to humans. From nuclear weapons etc. aspects, I realize the production created by science and technology threatens human as well. It is regretting that the knowledge with which I can use prohibits me from knowing more about the threats of science and technology and threats of universal environment! Thus I think threats of the universe are much larger than threats of science and technology! But I still advocate the importance of science and technology. The foremost reason is that I want to advocate atheism! Eliminate superstition of human to religion and divinity! Highlighting science is truth and my objective! Certainly, I don't think it is wrong (it is necessary to explain that I was a person who was also superstitious that divinity influenced the environment). When I didn't have an idea, I asked divinity for help. I am awakening to improve my mind because of understanding and cognition about scientific knowledge.
Why do I think the ultimate target of humans is the universe? Because I realize the natural environmental and resource problems that human will face, the problem that unreasonable use of science and technology will result in human's extinction, the problem that the earth may meet with the strike of a stellar object etc. which will result in humanity's extinction, and the problem that it will be hard for humans to continue survival on the earth because of resource exhaustions in future! Reconstruct and immigrate out stars in order to avoid all these problems! Because I think if human can live in the universe dispersedly, they can't confront the overall extinction! That is why I think the universe is ultimately of human. However, I didn't realize that it is possible that humans would confront extinction because of unreasonable use of some science and technology aspects before reaching these targets!
When I was thinking about these problems by myself, I happened to find your book and contact with you. How amazing is this coincidence! If I didn't see your book (this may also say that the influence caused by this book is not great in society), maybe I would go on thinking about these problems. Maybe I would trivialize the thought in this aspect, but pay more attention to life; conditions of myself also prohibit me going on thinking. It is just because I saw your book, I am still thinking and doing something that one member of humanity shall do.
It was really surprised when I saw the book ! I thought, "There is an unexpected book in this social value!" I was eager to know about the content of the book! After I read the catalogue, I was happier! There is still such a person in human society; then I thought it was worth losing something in life (saw the resonance)! Because of my loss in life, I got these in the aspect of thought which can't be exchanged with anything better in life! Without loss in life, there would be no thought today! The loss in life just creates my thought, which corresponds to one phrase of mine (Receiving and losing is one kind of ownership in life, determining the ownership of life is the largest ownership).
It is just because of my loss in life that I understand more, see life and the world clearly and improve my mind. After my experiences in life, I have stood aloof from worldly interests and fame, ended rushing about, gone back to my hometown and lived the personal and simple pastoral life of human society pursued in this book, which is primitive but fulfilling. Though I haven't sought fame and wealth and planned to stop listening to worldly things, I still focus on this significant subject of humanity, try my best to fulfill the obligation as one member of humanity and want to be a valuable person! I feel that studying the subject of humanity is significant all my life! Because I realized very early if humans end as a whole, nothing will come again! The significance that is known by humanity is established on the basis of humans' existence! Without humanity, all significance exists ignorantly.
I am not sure if I am complaining or not, but I think I am not highlighting or representing anything, I just want to show my attitude about life and the subject of humanity! I also want to let you know my impression about this book was made by a person of what kind of level so that you can accept…
Let's get down to business!
At present, from what I know, the book hasn't caused great influence in human society, but just attracted resonance and attention of a few people! Some people may have interest in this book but not pay attention to it. Many people have no interest in this or concern…
In current society, humans from every walk of society are busy with pursuing success and fame. Who can take these problems seriously? According to some situations that I know about on the internet and in the surrounding area, when I introduced this book to the person whom I thought had some ideas, someone would discuss about it with me at the beginning because they though it was very fresh, while the others had no interest in this book at all. It was not only the representation who received low education but also the people who received high education who knew little about this book. They were more willing to read romance novels, which can entertain spirits. Some people just think it is just some knowledge; their consciousness of reading is not very strong! Some people also think humanity will end sooner or later and hold the regardless attitude. There even some who think it is disgusting…
About the situation surrounding me, there are various people around me, though most of which are from low level of society (of course, I can't come in contact with the people with high education). But I still want to understand their viewpoints. I always introduce this book to the people with whom I think I can chat and ask some questions. Seen from their cognitive situation, it is not very optimistic. Some literate people think that there are some ideas in the book, but they don't have the idea to understand it further, while some other people prefer gambling or watching some programmers than reading books! It is funny that some people found me reading the book and thought I was practicing Falun Gong and doing pyramid sales or asked "Are you going to college?" "Have you joined some organization?" In my opinion, the book is beyond their experiences in their consciousness! I almost became "alienated." I doubt where the value in modern society is. I have nothing to say about it.
I always tried to persuade my father, who is susceptive of divinity, by using this book and adding some arguments, differentiation and materialistic…In my eyes, he is very mind-opened! But I failed; there was not much influence no matter how I made the arguments, differentiation and problems described in the book to him. I told him a simple differentiation opinion: "If you believe that humanity evolved, while humans will become extinct some day, if human being hadn't evolved to be human, were there ghosts and divinity in the world at that time?" If humanity extinguishes some day, will there still be ghosts and divinity in the world at that time? He believes humans evolved and will become extinct some day, but he still believes in his ghosts and divinity! I think thoughts of many people have been fixed, but I find they are funny and annoying! Maybe they can't be educated again!
Of course, this is only understanding with limitations on my side which can also reflect psychologies, ideas and values etc. of some people in modern society! I am not sure if it is helpful to your research, but I still want to let you know about it.
I am afraid it is not real if everyone can understand this question as you expected. I think it also can be deduced how many people will realize the importance of human problems from the aspects of competitive society that you described. I think there are a few people who are really awakened! At present, the traditional conception of people, states, nations and religions on the earth are still strong. As you said, it may not be successful to change one Muslim believer with all your life because most of them are brainwashed by traditional consciousness. Even if their leader tells them there is no divinity now and they shall believe in science, I am afraid these believers won't change themselves, which is caused by the consciousness of states, parties and religions! These consciousnesses of human are injected and guided by states, nations and religions! If you make the consciousness and conceptions impressed in the hearts of masses, you need both the time and guidance of a majesty body!
I don't know if there is an influence among the VIP mentioned in your letter, but I don't think it may be optimistic from their representation of administration or as you said "everything seems disappearing in sea" as the preface in your book! I am also thinking whether if you are too anxious to pursue quick results? In other words, how many degrees is reality factor allowing us to be in "pursuit of quick results"? If everything goes well, isn't it too abnormal? Is this still the character of humanity? Of course, nothing can't deny the importance of this book!
In my opinion, we shall start from our state firstly in order to affect human leaders because views on things of our state is objective compared with other states I also know that human consciousness of our leaders has been very mature, according to the ‘08 congratulatory address for new year of Present Hu! I also hear strong human consciousness from our scientist Ouyang Ziyuan…! Though their consciousness is a little different from ours, it is good to us!
I will state my viewpoints about the content of book in the following:
Since you asked me to "correct" in the replying letter (I think you won't judge people by their views), I will show my viewpoints shamelessly. At first, my viewpoint is based in the subjective differentiation on the objective level…
I will talk starting from Chapter VI, to deduce one of self extinction of human through Chapter VI. Philosophy understands science and technology is so amazing and seems so rational, but always goes beyond the used experiences of the people, not making more people form preventative consciousness to science and technology and realize its potential threats!
Through a series of demonstration analyses in these chapters, the essential appearance of extinction measures, the essential breakthrough of scientific and technological theories and the essential use of extreme measures make it known clearly that technology nowadays is just the beginning of a long history of humanity. The much more amazing thing is to establish science and technology in thousands of millions of years based on science and technology day by day, which is hard to reach by the thoughts of common people! The much more important thing is to inspire the problem in the progress of this development. We are not sure if we can go through this progress safely! It is possible that humans will be extinct at that time!
In the second section of Chapter VI, the abnormal member that you deduced may push asteroids to strike the earth. Personally speaking about the theories in the book, it is impossible to push asteroids to strike the earth; I think such action needs a mass of people, not just a few people. If science and technology has developed to push asteroids to strike the earth, I am sure the activities of humans are not limited on the earth only. Furthermore, the action is so big and it is easy to find the target. It is impossible for humans to reflect nothing! Even if there is a weapon to push asteroids, there will be also the weapon that can fight back pushing asteroids! Humans have the full time and ability to take counter measures! Thus I think this viewpoint is not so persuasive.
The first sentence in Chapter VII "The analysis in the previous chapter has demonstrated humans will extinguish by themselves essentially because of the development of science and technology, only if there is no appropriate method of stopping the development of science and technology". My suspicion is about the word "stop". I am sure you mean stop completely or…? Otherwise, according to the meaning of the sentence, it shall stop the development of all science and technology. Does it contradict with what you described in the following chapters: shall science and technology without question properly develop? This will affect some readers a little.
As with what you said, "The more demonstration foundations of self extinction of human, the better," I think it is right! However, individual demonstration is not very sufficient in your book. About this book, I think you shall demonstrate an individual problem for a long time as least so that it seems very sufficient (it is not required to be perfect). If everything reaches this extent, the book can display the style of a masterpiece more obviously.
In fact, the reason for invention of these extinction measures is competition; many sciences and technologies that threaten survival of humans create a competitive environment. You also know the details about them. No matter in what social environment, extinction measures without any purpose can also bring threats to humans unless humans don't prohibit its development. However, if human society unites, society achieves average prosperity…there is no competition among states in society … the science and technology developed by people shall be for the overall survival of humanity but not for threatening ourselves. Though development of science and technology for human survival will bring disaster, can happiness of humans be secured without relying on them?
On page 216 in the second section in Chapter VII "In order to avoid the extinction of humanity, the only choice is to think out ways to stop its steps of development (stop decisively) before it owns the power to extinguish humanity", I will say something about "stop decisivel" again, which contradicts with the following "shall promote the safe science and technology without being questioned greatly".
About the analogy of landmines, "Only if you walk forward, then you will die, because you will touch the landmine some day. In order to avoid touching the landmine, you only stop moving forward." So to speak, if humans stop moving forward, where is the direction of the road of humanity, to the left, right or back? Or just stop?
From the previous chapters, I know that external threat will extinguish humans after quite a long time, but if humans want to continue surviving on the day they will be extinguished externally, what shall they do? In addition, are those all external threats we knew of listed in your book? I think they are just permanent. Recently, I found out on the news that scientists found galaxies similar to the solar system 100,000 light years away from the earth…What I mean is that it seems that we have known about many situations in the universe today, but we will something new where is near to us! Therefore, macroscopically, the possibility that human will become extinct because of technology is still larger than that of external threat! What I want to say is that the time of external threat is not sure! It is not seen but will be found out later! The external threat is not really very far away, but the time of threat of science and technology is always shorter that that of external threats!
According to the third section in Chapter CII: In case we calculate according to consumption degree current resources and also stop the development of science and technology, to which day can humans survive relying the existing science and technology? Take the period that the sun changes to be red huge star; can the survival question of resources on the earth etc, support humans to survive such a long time?
Is it possible to ask humans to stop developing science and technology? I don't think so unless it is crucial. According to the arrangement of nature, human extinction is the matter after the sun becomes unstable, but who can guarantee humans will be safe and happy under the situation that development of science and technology is stopped? Can external factors stay the same after 50,000,000,000 years? Are they the entire galaxy environment that we found?
In the last sentence on page 223 in Chapter VII "The deduction of human extinction Gives us an important indication that concrete measure is to decisively (prevent) the development of science and technology when it is indeed necessary", in the front it is "stop", here is "prevent". It is a different word in the same sentence in different paragraphs. It will give a bad impression when read and disturb their thoughts and do harm to readers' thoughts.
In the fourth section of Chapter VII, Enlightenment of Extraterrestrial Life, in my opinion, your deduction of time of extraterrestrial life is ideal, subjective and programmed. You take the source of universe, the formation of the solar system and evolution of human life as reference, which is a little simple. It is hard to make the readers, whose knowledge and thought is meticulous, support you.
If it is necessary to analyze the reason for these insufficient "proofs", I have my own reasons; according to your deduction, you don't take the influence of objective factors as examples, but refer to the mode of human environment totally, which seems to be a law. According to this law, there will be many places to cultivate lives in the universe! Though I won't deny the possibility that your deduction exists completely, at least I don't think your "proofs" are sufficient; I have reason to suspect it.
It seems that we have known enough about universe, but I think only humans exist. What we know is not the whole of the universe; even if they are the whole, we may not know they are whole universe. As I mentioned before, I know that scientists found galaxies similar to our solar system 100,000 light years away (I can't remember the exact time clearly) from the earth in the news… (It is funnier that I am not sure this subjective differentiation is ok or not.)
You just make a subjective deduction without objective proof. You don't have any solid proof to prove that such prediction is applicable now, whether there is extraterrestrial life or not only if there is objective proof. I also think there may be such a deduction, but if there is no proof, who will believe in it? I hold an attitude about this. In addition, if you have personal emotional factors about this deduction (Thirdly, extraterrestrial life stops the continuous development of science and technology automatically. If they live in their own star calmly, they don't have the ability to travel among stars), then you want to highlight the importance of all personal factors! You care about the importance of humanity too much so that you have some subjective emotion sometimes. I have no idea if you agree or disagree with my opinion because mine is also subjective. I am not sure if my opinion is right!
In the fourth section of Chapter III, threat of extraterrestrial life, I saw one paragraph "Though we are not sure the proof the visiting of extraterrestrial life now, we know well about the particularity of cultivation conditions of intellectual life. We shall be sure there must be the existence of intellectual life. The reason is that our universe is so vast, the miracle will appear even if its rate is too small." Firstly, I don't mean that there is a problem in your sentence, I just want to propose my own suggestions: I also think the conditions of cultivating intellectual life are very particular, but I dare not make sure there must be existence of intellectual life. In addition, since the universe is so vast, the miracle will appear even if its rate is too small. On the contrary, there is also a rate without intellectual life because it is also very small, which is even smaller than that of the existence of intellectual life! Thus, there is also such a miracle. I feel I can't agree with the subject without proof. Theoretically, intellectual life is absolutely larger, but there is also a rate without intellectual life. (Maybe you may think I am against intentionally, I am not sure what it is.)
"The extraterrestrial society must the same as earthly society during the progress of science and technology development. On the one hand, they enjoy the results created by science and technology development; on the other hand, they also suffer the destruction brought by science and technology. As science and technology is developing forward at higher and higher levels, the destruction caused is larger and larger. One day, they will realize they will be destroyed by science and technology strongly by rational thought, so they are awakened suddenly and determined to stop developing science and technology and establish the corresponding system to guarantee the strict limitations of science and technology development. Therefore, extraterrestrial life that has stopped developing science and technology hasn't obtained the ability to travel among stars by science and technology measures. They are willing to live harmonious life in their own stars and live happily. Then we earthmen will not have the opportunity to meet them."
I think the above paragraph has a "novel" taste, maybe some readers of the paragraph will adjust to the reading atmosphere. I also think it lacks seriousness; according to your meaning, subjective imagination is not real; after reading it, we can imagine this is for highlighting the importance of stopping the developing science. Using this word to highlight an academic problem is a little annoying.
"Firstly, limitation of research of natural science theory shall be the greatest. If the safety of this theory cannot be guaranteed fully, then the research shall be killed absolutely. Because the breakthrough of a kind of scientific theory results in the breakthrough of a series of related science and technology and brand discipline theory, the huge science power caused by this is usually beyond the expectation and prevention of people.
About the above paragraph, I have another understanding again. Firstly, I don't know if stopping is the best way, but limitation is a good idea. Science and technology is amazing and indecisive, which is a law. My question is how do we guarantee the limitation is effective if we limit? Even minor research can cause discoveries without purpose, so how many kinds of researches of science and technology are so sure? Science and technology is always indecisive. Furthermore, who can actually limit the brain of humanity that is gradually developing? Who can limit the desire of exploring the universe? Who can limit the need of science and technology when people face the environment and resources etc. survival problems which can be solved by using technology? Is there a real mechanism that can guarantee people are "good" within thousands of years? Can we disguise these enlightenments brought by human history?
"Science and technology extinguishing humanity is calculated to be in one hundred years, while natural power extinguishing human is calculated to be a hundred million years"
About the word, I just want to say if the surrounding universe environment that we are seeing is the whole. It seems correct about the theory that extinguishing humanity is calculated in a hundred million years, but what we know now is only a little time. If it calculated to be in one thousand years, the soonest after the Industrial Revolution, which is only 200 years! Theoretically, humans will have much longer time. Can we make conclusions about the time in the future for humans with our current understanding? Could it be arbitrary decisions?
The overall survival of human is threatened by few real natural powers."
In this chapter, I don't think extending description of this word is sufficient. About the threats of showing natural powers, there are resource and environmental problems that humanity faces besides what you mentioned. Under the situation that science and technology is limited and humans can't develop other planets; can humans' resource last so long? During the progress, won't the environment deteriorate? How will you solve these problems? During millions of years that can survive, do human only have other planets, degradation of gene, threat of resource etc. problems? Do you think the overall psychological problem of human is a problem? The psychological problem is a big problem nowadays, though it is different from that in the following united society, there is no perfect united society. The psychological problem has multiple aspects.
About the problem of breaking though the limitation of science and technology, here it has been broken through actually. Even appropriate research shall threaten asteroids and resources! To solve these problems is to research and use science and technology further! Here is the broken limitation!
Now I am saying some viewpoints about limiting science and technology. Through your description, I know it is impossible to limit science and technology in the current social system. Human society must be united in order to limit science and technology. I also know that the reasons that state and society can't limit science and technology are permanent competiveness and eyeshot benefits etc.!
Therefore, if human society is united, the original benefits of every state, every religious group and nation etc, can receive real and practical democracy security (Of course, the existence of these ideologies will disappear in future). If humans can actually do this, I am sure the international anti-competitiveness among state societies shall disappear or reduce greatly, or only exist in some regions. After the international anti-competitiveness is reduced, science and technology endeavors against them will disappear naturally, then the overall researches of united government of human society in the aspects of science and technology shall be all for the survival demands of humanity (including the research due to curiosity). In fact, after human society is united and in case every aspect is fair and democratic, science and technology and international anti-competitiveness will reduce greatly again and correspondingly in the aspect that may extinguish humanity! In the united society of humans that I think, the limitation of science and technology shall be targeted, but not just considering the social demands of current situations comparing with the demand of millions of years! I think the limitation of science and technology shall aim at times and follow the demands of times' development to establish the mechanism that conforms to survival conditions to limit its application! There will be different survival factors in different times in the future, which we can't predict now. But you didn't describe it in this aspect.
In my opinion, the science and technology that copes with the long term survival problem of human can't be limited even if there is a little safe factor. After it is limited, humans will face survival problems as well as extinction because of survival problems. I think it is worth researching if the risk of survival is larger than that of breaking through science and technology research.
In the future united society of human, the science and technology that is proved completely safe to human can be allowed to be used, but the science and technology that can reach such requirements is very rare! Nowadays, humans have confronted the lack of resource and deterioration of environment etc. problems. The resources on the earth can't support to survive forever and the continuous deterioration discounts the sense of happiness of survival. If humans continue to survive, they must look for and develop new resources and science and technology to cope with the deterioration of the environment, while in the science and technology that looks for and develops resource and control deteriorated environment, some science and technology that forms threat to humanity must appear consequently. If human don't do this, survival of humanity will be threatened as well, and the happiness index of human will decrease too. If humans just existed for simple survival, where is the significance of humanity's intellectual gift by nature? In a human society that has no great dream but pursues rationally, humanity is just for simple existence, where the human intellect is displayed (The simple existence can't be the intellect that water still runs deeper and the largest intellect)? I think many people are suspicious of this. The long term survival of humans must need the support of resources, but the resources on the earth can't support for a very long time. How about recycling? Doesn't recycling need developing science and technology research? Someday, humans will face the challenge of survival because of resources and environment etc, a series of problem, which won't be very long. Humanity must fetch resources from other planets and look outside space for survival, I think.
In order to avoid suicide and homicide in the future, humans can live collectively; dispersion of survival space is also the choice to avoid extinction. Thus humans need to search for survival conditions from outer space. I also remember you said something similar in the book: may push an asteroid similar to the earth to the proper position to look for survival.
I am afraid it is too difficult to achieve this about the limitation of science and technology. As far as I know, there has been no perfect system that can't be broken through since human society. What is the influence to which even both you and I agree? Everything can't go smoothly! Your book can't wake humans up immediately. Even human will extinguish in a hundred years! It is not the problem of your book but the "temper" of humans.
It is no doubt that humans shall be united, which is necessary for limiting science and technology or confronting extinction or others. Some people have begun thinking humans will be united unconsciously. The problem seems very far away from them. If you give them a choice (Which will be the first, humans will be united or Iraqi will be on Mars?) I am sure most of them believe in the latter.
I agree with some of your plans on how to unite humans generally. But I suggest starting from the UN; I think the UN has its own value of existence. Of course, it is impossible to depend on it completely!
About you said, it is very small compared with every aspect in the previous society, but we can't be too optimistic. I also think a union will be very soon once this causes influence in the international society.
About the problem of uniting different cultures and languages in society, I think it only needs uniting official language and letters in the united society of humanity (The number of using English is not the largest, but it is very common in internal, pronunciation is easy to learn, but I don't know English). I don't think it is a good idea that just one language is kept and others are eliminated. This link is also very important. The progress of unions will be stuck if it can't be well done. It does well to humans and development of human civilization and culture, which is the proof and "living fossil" of the development of humanity's diversified cultures.
If the languages and letters of some group don't have creativity in the future development or bring objective influence to humans, then it will disappear naturally. What we need doing is to record the history, no need to trivialize it particularly.
We can see it from our current multinational state (China). Due to historical reasons, China is a multinational country in which most of them are Han nation, thus their language is most widely used, while some minorities have their own languages. However, the political bodies in China don't say that they will eliminate the languages of minorities'. On the contrary, the political bodies in China successfully adjust and promote the harmony among every nation. As we all know, the racial discrimination in China is minimum within the global range, which is much better than that of the countries that call for freedom. However, racial discrimination and conformation in China were also very strong in history, and there were threats to the governances of feudal classes. Though some feudal governors advocated union of nation with their efforts, discrimination and conformation existed to a great extent!
The government promotes use of a language of which using people are the largest. Other languages to every minority are popular normally in their life field, but they just can use one more language (official). Of course, someone can choose not to learn if they don't want contact with outside world. The government doesn't limit it but supports them to maintain, protect and develop their own language. Objectively, they want to keep in touch with the outside world, so they must learn the official language and the most used language to communicate (this is the principle that minorities are subordinate to the majority). It is also applicable to the dialect used by the Han nation in every region. If you want to understand the outlander, you must use the official language. In your own region, and you can use either dialect or official language as you wish only if others can see you.
The reason is the same for both language and culture; diversified culture will add colors to human life as well as enrich the spiritual life of humans. People can choose the language outside the office language as a hobby to learn so that it will strengthen their own cultural details etc. The language and culture aspect can't cause barriers to the progress of the union unless they are well treated. Only united society has become fact, which can bring common benefit to masses. Actually, language and culture won't cause negative influence to the society. Language and culture is related to nation and religion, which must be well treated. It is a targeted problem.
About the religion problem, I have to admit the fact of existence though I repel this very much. In my opinion, religion will be eliminated naturally at last. Therefore, it can maintain its current status and position if doesn't affect the politics. In the united society, the attitude with which government treats religion shall be as the Chinese government does.
In your Chapter X, "Though some people in China are religious, 90% are atheists. Furthermore, China is a country with light religion color in history. Thus, China represents atheism." I don't think what you said "90% are atheists" is right. In China, there are atheists on the high level of intellects, but some of them are superstitious. In addition, most common people in China don't often go to church or go on a pilgrimage as that in some country with strong religion consciousness, but most masses in the lower level of society are superstitious. Though they are not superstitious in a certain religion, witchcraft is popular at this level. In addition, religions permeate each other, so the way of people's superstition is very complicated. If you let them tell which God belongs to which religion, they don't know either (Don't think I am deducing, but they are very common around me). It is very strange that many masses are very superstitious, so it is very appropriate to describe them with "When times are easy, we do not burn the incense, but when the trouble comes, we embrace the feet of the Buddha." Praying for ancestors for blessing is also a way of superstition. If you ask me to give examples, there are too many examples. I am not sure which one is proper and it will be very complex. I won't explain concretely.
The following is what I think of your four questions:
I. Science and technology will extinguish mankind if it continues to develop and the time won't be very long;
This problem is very clear. I have no doubt about it, so I won't say anything more.
II. In order to solve the above mentioned problems, humans must move forward to union;
This question is very clear as well. It is applicable that every country can limit science, which is proved to be impossible. Even if it is possible, the difficulty will be larger than the union of humanity, so I won't say anything more.
III. What measures we shall take to realize union;
At present, it is not practical to make a good plan about "How to unite human society and what kind of united society we shall establish". The more important thing is to lay a mature foundation of thought. If the basic foundation of thought is not well laid, it is just fanciness to talk about the union problem. In order to unite human society and limit science and technology, we must start from laying the foundation of thought for the people of every level. Only if such thoughts are enlightened, there will be many people to promote the union progression.
I think it is very hard to unite human society, especially in politics! The extinction time of humans in hundreds of years or even shorter time may not move those leaders. How many people will persist facing so many hard problems?
About the plan of promoting a union, I think it needs many intellectual people to discuss together .The plan which is made by one or a few people is hard to represent the viewpoints of majority. I can't think out a concrete plan now because of my limited ability.
In order to promote the union progress, intellects of majority must be accumulated. According to the curr