There is no doupt that optimism towards 21st century and its viability to enhance the world is a great concern, especially with the background of rapidly developing technologies I think there are valid arguments for both, approving and diminishing this optimism.
Firstly, the unevitable rise of global problems prevents making rapid improvements to the world. As a result, it will take more than a century to make meaningful positive changes. For instance, global warming causes variety of other issues that humanity has to eliminate first. In addition, part of the humanity that hold most of the money is not interested in solving these problems, because it is a possible source of income that can be exploited. Take for example building companies that may have to work twice due to earthquakes or floods. Lastly, making any changes requires time to see the results, especially speaking of the world itself, that can not be altered quickly by human means.
On the other hand, development of new technologies opens new opportunities to humanity, especially for bringing positive changes to the world. A good example would be water filtration system or environmentally friendly cars. As a predictable outcome, environment would recover from damage caused by humanity over the last few decades. Furthermore, even the small action like planting a tree are already considered to be positive and have significant effect on the world. Lastly, these alterations should not be considered to be only in the field of environment. Thus, enhancing society or other sectors are also considered to be positive alteratior. Consequently, almost any beneficial deed is contributing to the world and can be considered positive. However, positive changes in the environment and medicine are most appreciable.
Overall, I believe that new century allows new positive alternations to take place, without any aberrations preventing improvements.
There is no
doupt
that optimism towards 21st century and its viability to enhance the
world
is a great concern,
especially
with the background of
rapidly
developing technologies I
think
there are valid arguments for both, approving and diminishing this optimism.
Firstly
, the
unevitable
rise of global problems
prevents
making rapid improvements to the
world
.
As a result
, it will take more than a century to
make
meaningful
positive
changes
.
For instance
, global warming causes variety of other issues that
humanity
has to
eliminate
first
.
In addition
, part of the
humanity
that hold most of the money is not interested in solving these problems,
because
it is a possible source of income that can
be exploited
. Take
for example
building
companies
that may
have to
work twice due to earthquakes or floods.
Lastly
, making any
changes
requires time to
see
the results,
especially
speaking of the
world
itself, that can not
be altered
quickly
by human means.
On the other hand
, development of
new
technologies opens
new
opportunities to
humanity
,
especially
for bringing
positive
changes
to the
world
. A
good
example would be water filtration system or
environmentally
friendly cars. As a predictable outcome, environment would recover from damage caused by
humanity
over the last few decades.
Furthermore
, even the
small
action like planting a tree are already
considered
to be
positive
and have significant effect on the
world
.
Lastly
, these alterations should not be
considered
to be
only
in the field of environment.
Thus
, enhancing society or other sectors are
also
considered
to be
positive
alteratior
.
Consequently
, almost any beneficial deed is contributing to the
world
and can be
considered
positive
.
However
,
positive
changes
in the environment and medicine are most appreciable.
Overall
, I believe that
new
century
allows
new
positive
alternations to take place, without any aberrations preventing improvements.