The Progression of Mankind

The progression of mankind is often compared to a rocket, always climbing higher. I think that we are falling from an unknown height, gaining speed with each passing second. Some day we will hit terminal velocity, falling faster than we could have imagined in our wildest dreams. Someday to will not think for ourselves, because machines will be thinking for us. That is the day we lose consciousness from the change in air pressure. And it's already starting. With each new invention we think less and less. A part of our brain knows that we should try to make a parachute or something to save ourselves, but those thoughts are drowned out by the thoughts of how incredibly fun it is to fall, not realizing that in the end, we die. At the very end we will regain consciousness long enough to see the ground quickly coming up to meet us, and we will scream, wishing we had never jumped in the first place, or that we had saved ourselves before it was too late, but by the time we finish that thought we will lie broken on the hard ground beneath us. And since we have fallen so far from everything we knew there will be nobody to clean up our mangled body, and we will stay there as a reminder to all to stay far back form the edge.

Reviews

[Bobbob]

This piece begins saying that mankind generally believes humankind is progressing. Progress generally being referred to as an advance in technology.

The author takes a spin on the word progress. She states that she believes progress is in decline, through metaphor; stating that mankinds capability to "think for themselves" (I believe manage their physical resources, and political institutions) because "machines will be thinking for us".

This premise, in that the common man does not rule themselves, or make decisions for themselves anymore (for this to be relevant to the audience) ,because of technology, is stilted at best.

This implies that mankind has had some degree of control over itself, in reference to the masses. I find that this has just never been the case. Most of mankind has always been under the control of a strict select few since animals have been domesticated.

This piece then turns from an attempt at societal commentary to a the rambling of things to come from a speaker; without any evidence, this piece ends with the destruction of mankind, or the end of life as we know it.

The speaker does not suggest for the audience to change their ways, or to rebel against the powers that be; in that regard it's fatalistic.

This is an opinion piece with no style, nuance, or syntax/paragraph structure. It is a mashing of metaphors, one observation on a modern general consensus, and loads of graphic imagery.

I can only say that the character speaking the piece is a bit pretentious to guess the end of mankind as we know it without suggesting one reason why. And, in addition to my analysis of the character, is that they have a penchant for the use of flowery words without any substance.