Questioning the climate but still wanting to save the trees

[Leigh Blackall]

This is a Leigh rant, all too serious for some, all too full of it for others, but the link to Lindzen's article is certainly a beautiful read...

The stuff that Stephen used to push had some faint thread of truth and relevance to our small corner of Otago Sustainability I think... To me, his was a nagging reminder to keep vigilant on that tipping point where an idea or set of ideas go from being alternative and counter culture, to becoming mainstream and collectively endorsed. It is at that tipping point where the power and control changes hands, and the original meaning changes through that vacuous period. Steven was convinced on something many of us considered unbelievable or too simple.. I thought I saw threads of indirect truth lying under it, and in everything around me, but his bizarre links to things too specific kept breaking my concentration...

It is amazing to me, reflecting on my 35 years, being born into a nuclear family of hippy parents who farmed, spun, knitted, wove, potted and smoked.. only to grow up anxiously through the 80s and under an an 80% divorce rate and hedonistic disillusionment.. into young adult hood of suiciding Curt Cobains or adrenaline equivalence.. saved by trance music and Ecstasy.. then into neo environmentalism arguing with my been-there-done-that parents.. and finally the Internet bringing in the world to burst my little bubble... Lately I feel like I might be free of those past constraints and starting to see a world beyond such self centred horison lines. Only starting...

What I mean to say is upon reflection there appears to be rhythms and consistency under all this distraction, and I can sense a big shadow of absence over in the corner.. something we all should probably acknowledge, but don't. And it is the question of what that is that has me restless. It is probably the same thing that will prevent us (and my parents before me) from discovering a sustainable or resilient life together. It is that same absent thing that creates the vacuum when the power shifts, and the other thing that fills that vacuum as a result, is not nice to see.

The link below is a chance to see some of that thing that fills the vacuum, and perhaps think about where we see it locally...

Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?
Richard S. Lindzen
Program in Atmospheres, Oceans and Climate
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
November 29, 2008

..Although the focus of this paper is on climate science, some of the problems pertain to science more generally. Science has traditionally been held to involve the creative opposition of theory and observation wherein each tests the other in such a manner as to converge on a better understanding of the natural world. Success was rewarded by recognition, though the degree of recognition was weighted according to both the practical consequences of the success and the philosophical and aesthetic power of the success. As science undertook more ambitious problems, and the cost and scale of operations increased, the need for funds undoubtedly shifted emphasis to practical relevance though numerous examples from the past assured a strong base level of confidence in the utility of science. Moreover, the many success stories established ‘science’ as a source of authority and integrity. Thus, almost all modern movements claimed scientific foundations for their aims. Early on, this fostered a profound misuse of science, since science is primarily a successful mode of inquiry rather than a source of authority.

--
--
Leigh Blackall
+64(0)21736539
skype - leigh_blackall
SL - Leroy Goalpost
http://leighblackall.blogspot.com

[Anni Watkins]

There is a lot to think about there Leigh. Age and upbringing may have something to do with it, but possibly less than you think. I'm a generation older than you (well nearly) and my version of events looks a bit like the inside-out version of yours, but I suspect comes to the same place.

"Thus, almost all modern movements claimed scientific foundations for their aims. Early on, this fostered a profound misuse of science, since science is primarily a successful mode of inquiry rather than a source of authority."

Indeed. I was rigorously trained in science, to an almost 'religious' intensity, including the fact that a true scientist must believe nothing absolutely!

It is an interesting interface. We have tools to explain the world, authority, science, spiritual ways, art, etc. None of them do everything we need (that's my opinion, some people obviously think there is one answer).

I have some wilder thoughts, not so much on what I think, but on possible ways to think, that might get a bit closer to what is in, or is missing from, the shadowy corner. They are thoughts many people are trying to have, but which may be occluded by the western rationalist training. Did you read about the physicists who went to learn Aborigine languages in the hopes that there were ways to discuss ideas in those languages that simply aren't accessible in English? I think it may be behind what draws people to science fiction, fantasy, and even neo-paganism, and I think it may be a kind of algorithm for contemplating morality, possibly in a slightly less "God-the-father", slightly more individually centred, logocentric way...... Anyway, I'll think about it and if I come up with anything I think might be useful, we can expand a thread on it.

We might call it something more to the point than climate and trees?

>>> Leigh Blackall <leighb...@gmail.com> 14/06/2009 7:28 p.m. >>>

This email has been scrubbed for your protection by SMX. For more information visit smx.co.nz

[Leigh Blackall]

Thanks for the response Anni.. I like where you're going, I did know about those crazy scientists thinking they could get linguistic insight through learning an ancient language. I spose we could get some, I thought I made such insights when I learned to speak Mandarin to a basic level, and that they do not have words for "his" or "her", and what it might mean to be a native speaker of a language that does not have gender infused on everything. I really like Chomsky's work too.

Climate and/or trees: Its papers like that Lindzen one - things that quiet clearly call into question all that we have been recently lead to believe is rational scientific fact, that has me asking questions of so what, why and how this conflict of interest takes place, and is it in and around us as well? Of course it is! That's the unsettling bit. But I know no alternative approach to action, apart from "non violent action", which won't get performance measures, or satisfy the impatient... :)

In the education sector, for some reason we have adopted a belief in "critical thinking" as the thing we strive to teach, as though it was a type of action. But I rarely if ever get in a conversation with anyone about what that actually means. Its one of those things I guess we're expected to know what it is, and so its a no-go-zone for questioning. My guess is that its some form of questioning, a little like your scientific training Anni - but in practice it pulls back at the point of actually applying scientific rigor, because in truth that is directionless. So critical thinking has become like so many words in educational practice.

How critical is critical thinking in the development of sustainable practitioners? if that is what we think we can do here.. are all these questions a good place to be? Maybe we should just get on with it and see, for which creative thinking would be a more appropriate thought process to have.. all enrol in art now!

Anyway, getting my undies in a twist. I think I'll just get on with it for now, confident that my creative thinking abilities will get me out of sticky situations, where my lack of critical thinking makes me unable to see those situations coming in the first place!