1
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to create a world where after really violent wars, Humanity nearly disappeared due to the power of newly developped technologies. After that, survivors decide through multiple modifications (DNA or someting like that...) to connect all people born after them with a sort of collective consciousness, but for feelings, to try to create a "global empathy" to nullify violence.

I'm searching for reason why this solution worked on a short period, the test period but went wrong after a long time (possibly on next generations), leading to a worse world than ever.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Emotional conflict on almost all levels. For everything you love there will be someone who hates them. Spread this dissonance across the minds of the whole population and have an insane world. Nothing would be of value for anyone. The test groups would be close enough to each other for it to be workable. Globally, unstable. $\endgroup$
    – a4android
    Jul 25, 2017 at 1:53

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
0
$\begingroup$

Perhaps it pretty much like with anything that is repressed: It comes back up. For a while, the effort helped humanity to suppress it's violent tendencies, but those tendencies started to pile up in this artificial collective consciousness, slowly 'poisoning' it. After a certain threshold was reached, this started to damage pretty much everyone's mind, transforming a huge percentage of the human population into violent monsters (psychologically) with only a few people being able to more or less resist those violent tendencies.

(Ok, sounds like a variations of the Crossed Comics now ;-)).

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Because even if you have moral victory somebody else still have your head on their plate.

What are you talking about is the Serenity plot. Miranda people became so docile they just died (something like Buddhist monks mummifying themselves while still alive). While on the other hand your lack of violence would leave you unable to defend as everything you could do would be violent. You couldn't kill a wasp so you would die from allergy. Attacked by carnivores? Dead.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .