Discuss: Snap into Action for the Climate

I’ve continued to watch this conversation with great interest, although I’ve been sidelined with a nasty case of whooping cough; during this period of my own personal malaise, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the two things which seem, to me at least, to be at the heart of our current dilemmas…

(1) what Paco refers to as our ‘titantic hubris,’ this ongoing worship of technology as our savior, and (2), what I think of as not just a ‘crisis’ of imagination, but in fact, a failure of imagination…

There are very many things about technology I can, and do, appreciate - but how often we seem to forget that technology in and of itself has no regard for humanity, integrity, compassion?  These are the elements that feel to be missing from this equation.  Some of our greatest scientists have certainly recognized this:

Technological progress is like an ax in the hands of a pathological criminal.
Albert Einstein (1879-1955) German-Swiss-U.S. scientist.

When you see something that is technically sweet, you go ahead and do it and you argue about what to do about it only after you have had your technical success. That is the way it was with the atomic bomb.
Julius Robert Oppenheimer (1904-1967) American nuclear physicist.

This act of doing things because we can, without regard to *why* we are doing them, or *what* the impact could or would be to our fellow travelers on this planet is so terrifically short-sighted.  And now that most of what happens in our culture is driven by corporations - whose overarching rationale might be characterized as ‘profit at any cost’ - is it any wonder we willingly narcotize ourselves into passivity and denial so as to avoid the breaking of our hearts were we to awaken to the real truth of this soul-less and miserable existence?

Technology is not, in itself, evil, but it is heartless.  Its definition: the practical application of knowledge especially in a particular area, certainly doesn’t speak of the horrors of Hiroshima, or the many follies of the foolish.

One might say it is appropriately devoid of the kinds of passions that so easily lead us astray. But at the same time, it’s a traveler on the same path as “I was only following orders...”

There is no moral compass resident in technology, no guiding ethic, rather it is, quite specifically, amoral… And this is precisely why putting technology in the lead, blindly following because we can, rather than asking the question, “should we?” will always take us to that precipice of ‘titanic hubris’ of which Paco spoke so eloquently.

And this is what brings us to that ‘failure of imagination.’ The failure, I believe, is that of not insisting that technology be yoked in tandem with humanity and compassion, the bedrock of what it means to be human… According to Merriam-Webster, compassion is a sympathetic consciousness of others’ distress together with a desire to alleviate it.  How different would our lives be if that single concept were at the foreground of our consciousness?

We’ve allowed ourselves to devolve to the level of the amorality of our technology, and it will require every shred of imagination we possess to step away from that position.  I truly believe that nothing less than re-inhabiting our own humanity, as fully as we possibly can, will suffice in finding our way through the perils now on our threshold.

Hi Julianne,

I’m glad you’re well enough to re-enter the conversation. A beautifully written piece (Post 57). I agree with everything you said. The only thing I can add is to focus on the very last sentence:

“I truly believe that nothing less than re-inhabiting our own humanity, as fully as we possibly can, will suffice in finding our way through the perils now on our threshold.”

I agree entirely. The question is whether we are so far enmeshed in the technological web we’ve created that we no longer know ourselves? And if we do re-discover our humanity, which portion will it be? The highest? Or the lowest?

The answer to this question, of course, depends on the quality of the individual doing the re-discovering. Theodore Roszak (Person/Planet: The Creative Disintegration of Industrial Society, 1978) points out that cultural creativity has always been the province of a minority. With a planet of nearly seven billion, the size of that minority has to be larger than ever, if its influence is to be felt.

What you and I might regard as our common human birthright—compassion, for example—is actually an achievement. Even those who adhere to traditional religions have no guarantee that the old dispensations—for example, law (among the Jews) and faith (among the Christians)—will vouchsafe to them the blessings of compassion. It remains a personal achievement, now more than ever, and often in spite of the fulminations from the pulpit.

So it’s a paradoxical task: it’s up to individuals to reach deep enough within to connect with their basic humanity. “Humanity” itself cannot do it. Only individuals can.

We may be in the throes of discovering a new dispensation. But it will not be based on prescriptive law, nor on blind faith, as in the past: the new dispensation for the future will be based on experience.

Paco

Dear Paco,

Thank you for your compliments (Post 56) for my photographs. Sorry they move too fast - you can always hang out for another round; or soon (geologically speaking) the rest of the website will be revamped so that those that invite you in will lead on to the rest.

I think your points about imagination and - if this doesn’t move beyond the sense of what you wrote - passion are crucial. If anything I wrote seems to say otherwise it only shows how amateurish a writer I am.

But, and this is a big ‘but’ - this thing called technology can’t be made a bogey-person so easily; nor can, as you seem to be saying, ‘numbers’.

‘Worship of numbers’ (you repeat the phrase twice) and numbers as ‘final determiners of value’are, neither of them, what I would drive for in looking to understand the dilemma in which we find ourselves. But I bet you have a ‘reaction’ of some kind if you reach for your wallet and it - along with a certain ‘number’ of tokens of buying power - are missing. Or the pilot of an airplane in distress, who goes ‘by the numbers’ to restore control and stability.

If anyone can show me the ‘bright line’ that separates domestication of livestock, development of the arch, celestial navigation, perspectival representation, and the invention of the calculus from ‘technology’ I will be pleased to be shown the way.

That is why the real theme of my previous post (55) was that of being fully informed, especially with respect to technical issues.

And basing decisions, above all decisions with political consequences, on that breadth of knowledge. And not only.

So Paco, how much voodoo is enough?

Moral, ethical.... philosophical… and the whole person, of course. And if the roof leaks? Put out the fire! Then we can start talking.

Hm. Just remembered: science (along with its handmaiden, technology) is part of philosophy.

While I’m agree as to we have to fix this, and there is no time.  If sulfur is an answer, do we know the side effects of putting this in our air and what impact this will have on our plant, animal and human life?  While I know that the snap effect would be worse, we just need to be prepared on the chain reaction effect of putting this in our air.  We will need to educate and prepare all humans to take action, farmers, ranchers, zoo keepers and those out in the middle of no where, what about tribes in remote locations of the world that don’t understand any of this.  How are we going to educate them?

I agree is time for a drastic change in our idea and it has to start on top, the government and it needs to start here with us, but like everything it’s all about politics and really, money, money talks.  The big guys that have all the power behind the scenes as to why changes haven’t already taken change.  If convert to electric cars, then the oil companies would be hurting, but they will just have to open up companies that build batteries instead, and car manufactures will need to move on to electric car technology.

Then the war of oil would stop, then it would move to other resources, but that’s another topic.  While there are other sources, it can not be water, since we already are lacking it and it will become a high price ticket item one day.  But no one can live without it and it grows our food supply.

So what’s left, well as you said wind, but also solar, I live in the southwest, where there are more sunny days than rain, here out of all places we should have everything solar, including cars.

That is where research needs to go, and the government should encourage that with tax credits and so on, not totally educated in the subject, but last I heard we don’t have incentives as California those or use to.  The government needs to make companies make this product more affordable to the average citizen, I would love to be able to have a solar panel and be able not to have the electric bill that I have and be able to pass on the electricity to assist in the cause, but I can’t because is to hard to make ends meet as it is.
But if I could take the money I spend on electricity and purchase a solar system then eventually it will pay for itself and would cut cost.  I’m sure there are upkeeps, but they should make a reliable product that will last.  That is why the government needs to regulate it.  But again, politics talk, like the gas pricing, in Arizona there seems to be always a broken pipe that makes the prices go up every summer, and gas stations close down the day that it’s even announced to save the gas for the next day when the prices go up and yet there are no price regulations on gas, funny that issue can’t be resolved even though it is such a big topic at least there.

As I’m a big fan of doing good for the green cause, and actually I think it should be law to recycle our waste, I can also understand the how it’s hard for some of our population.
Not all of us have great incomes and are leaving pay check to pay check and can’t afford to pay extra for another trash can to recycle.  I know this from experience, I’m a single parent household due to divorce.  I think the government needs to take a stand and make the cities, towns, maybe place trash bins so those that can’t afford to have their own bins can recycle by taking it down to a larger community one.  This will cause would be a great cause, and it would not cost them anything, they just have to involve a recycling company.

Well let’s of hope for a change, and somone taking action, let’s do it together.

Juxtaposing this article with one I just finished reading here at Orion, titled “The Gospel of Consumption”, raises some interesting points for discussion.

I fail to see how the world’s elite, convinced as they are about the supremacy of the almighty dollar, will yield to the idea anytime soon of reduced consumption. This concept does not exist in their world and without it the policies of our government (the elite, monied business crowd) will not and cannot change towards anything that resembles a contraction of economic activity.

For the elite and the ruling class to get onboard of any ship named “sustainability”, there has to be a buck in it. The alternative, for the ruling class to lead the way towards environmentally sound policies, or even to be forced along by the population, is a pipe dream.

Additionally, according to my college biology prof, all species follow a bell curve of population over time. The species starts off, establishes a steady-state population with a slight growth rate upwards, but fairly steady. Then something in the environment allows for the population to climb at an astronomical rate, such as Mr. Tidwell mentions about the Canadian beetles. From no beetles to a large population rapidly. Eventually, the trees will no longer provide food or shelter for the beetles, or the climate will get too cold or harsh for them, or something else, and they will die off in huge numbers. As will we, my friends. The curve has an upswing, a rapid peak, a sharp decline, and the good news for ours and all species, a relatively long gentle downward slope towards eventual extinction.

It could be global warming and it’s consequences that gets us over the top of the spike into the one-third remaining population part of the graph, but if it’s not that it will be something else, nuclear war over scarce remaining resources, accidental release of some contaminant or agent, etc. etc. If Mr. Tidwell’s idea to pump chemicals into the sky doesn’t take off, something else will. Of course, the idea borders on lunacy as do any that require more of the same. The Homeopathic approach to any technological problem only makes it worse.

Moreover, we as a species here in the West have come to resemble the Star Trek alien species The Borg- half-machine half-human creatures devoid of any feeling or humanity, only subservient automatons in an Economic SpaceCube.

The popular uprising required to change the entire way of life of entire western societies, the will to do it has been stripped by alpha-wave brainwashing (television and mass media).  The aformentioned article tells of the resulting Borg-like world we now live in, with the entire rest of the world clamoring to emulate as soon as possible, with a little help from Halliburton and Coca-Cola. The Gods MUST be Crazy!

To me, it’s not about hope or pessimism, it’s about nature, the will of nature . We are not immune to this force. We have out-stripped our sustainable resources and are now living on borrowed time, of which we have little if Mr. Tidwell is correct in his geo-climatic conclusions.

i think she is right the change must happen now.i my self am pagan and i know for a fact that pagans help nature in many ways b/c it is embeded in us to perserve nature b/c that is what my religion is about not just magik but also nature. if people would not let their religions hold them back there could be a change. and im not saying you have to be pagan to help nature every one can and every one should. if they want to survive. i agree with julianne on the acid rain also how could that be ignored if were the reason it is produced b/c of the polution factories emitt to make that things that make it were we can live comfortble. id rather live with out such comforts and survive then have them and be destriyed

Bob Tyson (aka) T 5.5

Hi Bob,

Many thanks for the intelligent, well-written response to my Post 56.

Interestingly, I agree with everything you said in your Post 59.

It occurs to me that we are trying to wrap our heads around the most comprehensive problem that humanity has ever faced. Just imagining how to determine the scale of the problem, in all its stunning complexity, and then asking the right questions, is a daunting task.

It’s a bigger challenge, in a sense, than figuring out “The Theory of Everything.” The physicists can keep pursuing their “elegant” theory, and if the solution escapes them for decades, for centuries, or forever, it doesn’t really interfere with their quest per se. But even if they do arrive at The Theory of Everything, they still will probably have very little to say about how to deal with the practical, ecological, political, emotional, economic, ethical, philosophical dimensions of the global crisis. Of course, a comprehensive Theory of Everything will certainly play a PART in the new cosmology that’s developing, and the new cosmology—with all the number-based science it implies—must sooner or later form part of the foundation of the new world-view that we so desperately need.

That’s the problem we’re all facing. We’re trying to deal with a troublesome future that is calling for new ways of acting, thinking, seeing, feeling, relating, imagining, etc., but we’re trying to do that on the basis of the same attitudes and viewpoints that led to “the troubles” in the first place. We can’t expect “more of the same” to get us through—it can only get us into a deeper mess than ever. That’s why the idea of sulphur bombs in space evokes such disgust in many Orion readers.

It’s not surprising, then, if occasionally we lock horns over words, or overreach in our efforts to express ideas for which no developed vocabulary really exists. I come from a psychological, therapeutic, dream-oriented, musical and artistic background. I count on images that come to me spontaneously from the depths of the psyche. You come from a scientific background, I gather, and count on the accurate treatment of precise numbers. Both of these perspectives are valuable in themselves, and in my opinion they MUST eventually reach some accomodation, if not common ground, if we are to succeed in our evolutionary task. The coming together will require as much art as science, autonomous images as much as numbers.

So, what it boils down to is that I’m groping in the dark. I cast about for ideas, images and insights that will enable me, first of all, to avoid losing myself in the turbulent sea of facts, data and information we’re all swimming in. In addition, my quest for images is not just personal. I am simultaneously searching for the healing formula which, my experience and temperament have convinced me, is emerging from the “unconscious.” If it were a matter of conscious productions alone, we would have long since invented the secret recipe we are so deeply hungering for.

In your own way, I know you want to do the same, which is why I appreciate your thoughtfulness and concern. Your “solutions” will differ from mine, of course, but “truth is a concert of many voices.” What is certain is that the crystallized forms we have created, and which are slowly strangling the planet, need all the solvents we can apply, as soon as possible. Therefore we must pool our “solutions.”

There is an old alchemical saying about fixing the volatile, and volatilizing the fixed. We need both. We need to fix the volative ideas buzzing around in our heads and pouring through our fingers in our dreams. But we also need to volatilize the fixed forms of our institutions and modes of thought, to free up the energy needed to meet the challenges ahead.

I apologize for taking so long to respond. I didn’t realize you had answered my last post (thank you, Orion).

Take care, Bob

Paco

P.S. Can you convert you photo website from an automatic lap-dissolve format to a click-when-you’re-ready format? I don’t know anything about it.

Also, can you set it up to allow comments?

CORRECTION:

We need to fix the VOLATILE ideas buzzing . . . .