how to make degrowth work
Harris, Craig
from the journal “nature” . . .
Wealthy countries can create prosperity while using less materials and energy
if they abandon economic growth as an objective,
argues a group of researchers in ecological economics.
They outline five key research challenges that will have to be met
to re-focus economic activity around securing human needs and well-being.
“The question is no longer whether growth will run into limits,” they write,
“but rather how we can enable societies to prosper without growth,
to ensure a just and ecological future.”
cheers,
craig
Rees, William E.
I agree that it is good to see Nature tackling the subject of degrowth and this is a good article by way of introducing some of its basic principles. However, there are major issues. Here are some reflections I just sent to another group that had introduced this article:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 1:49:01 PM
To: SCORAI Group
Subject: [SCORAI] how to make degrowth work
| [CAUTION: Non-UBC Email] |
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
- Join SCORAI: https://scorai.net/join
- Submit an item to next newsletter: daniel...@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/PH7PR12MB5805AE4A28C9353775B90CCCBBE29%40PH7PR12MB5805.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.
Tom Walker
Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/6467bc7fe97841bc94902d8da219b65f%40mail.ubc.ca.
Martin Calisto Friant
Martin Calisto Friant
Tel: +31 636 08 7300
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/martin-calisto-friant/
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Calisto_Friant
Skype: martin.friant
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CANz%2BBQynPuUw1e-LS9vmvz51CFj3Zkum5r3-LzF2MRNft%2BreuA%40mail.gmail.com.
Joe Zammit-Lucia
The reality is that we only 'know' what needs to be done within one particular framing - the importance and priority that WE put on climate action. Once we remove that crutch and put climate action lower down on the priority list for action (as it is for much of the population), then I suggest we really have little idea of what's to be done. Articles, studies and all the rest that come up with the various 'whats' but leave it at that - separated from the 'how' - are a sure sign that the 'what' we have come up with is not, in practice, very useful at all.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CANz%2BBQynPuUw1e-LS9vmvz51CFj3Zkum5r3-LzF2MRNft%2BreuA%40mail.gmail.com.
Ashwani Vasishth
At the Nature page, I happened to see:
Related Articles
GDP is getting a makeover — what it means for economies, health and the planet
Are there limits to economic growth? It’s time to call time on a 50-year argument
Assessing social aid: the scale-up process needs evidence, too
Climate change is costing trillions — and low-income countries are paying the price
Get the Sustainable
Development Goals back on track--
Ashwani
Vasishth vasi...@ramapo.edu (201) 684-6616 (Jabber-enabled)
http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~vasishth
--------------------------------------------------------
Professor of Sustainability
Convener, Sustainability Program (BA)
Convenor, Environmental Studies Program (BA)
Director, Center for Sustainability
http://ramapo.edu/ramapo-green
http://ramapo.edu/sustainability
You can ALWAYS set up an Appointment with me, without negotiation, seven days a week,
at: https://calendly.com/vasishth/webex-meeting
Ramapo College of New Jersey
505 Ramapo Valley Road, SSHS, Mahwah, NJ 07430
--------------------------------------------------------
I respectfully acknowledge that Ramapo College is located on the ancestral and traditional Indigenous territory of the Ramapough Lenape Nation.
Related Articles
--
Jean Boucher
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CANz%2BBQynPuUw1e-LS9vmvz51CFj3Zkum5r3-LzF2MRNft%2BreuA%40mail.gmail.com.
Tom Abeles
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/f0NMX2OACt5eWpbIOI11Aeb89q96PcRjZaMFh_Gitt3mTN0erriD-5MtkNCOrZM6%40ip-10-0-10-113.cloze.com.
John Ehrenfeld
First, let me define what I mean by “fixes.” I mean technological or technocratic (institutional) means that are aimed primarily at addressing the symptoms or the proximate causes of some problematic situation. In the case of climate change, such fixes include reducing greenhouse gas emissions by replacing carbon-based energy systems with renewable sources. Carbon taxes also fit this label. Geo-engineering techniques to prevent warming by reflecting more solar influx are also under discussion these days.
The danger in focusing on such “solutions” is that insufficient attention will be paid to more deeply rooted causes. In systems-dynamics lingo, such defocusing is called shifting-the-burden. This occurs when little or no attention is given to finding and addressing root causes. Root causes are those aspects in complex systems that are often found buried deep in the hierarchy of determinative relationships. I believe that this is exactly what is happening today with virtually all discussions about climate change.
The argument that follows is not against applying fixes altogether, but only in conjunction with sufficiently large and comprehensive attacks on the root causes. If the root causes are left in place, the fixes will very likely fail sometime in the future. Fixes-that-fail is another systems dynamics archetype.
So how can we uncover the root causes of climate change. I think I already know the answer, but let me apply a powerful method, developed by Toyota and central to their production system (TPS). It is simple in structure: ask why five times in succession, and, by the time to get beyond two or three, you are likely to light on a root cause. So let’s begin by starting with this problem: The Planet is warming, which increase is changing climate and producing significant threats to human settlements and to natural systems.
Why #1 Why is the Earth heating up?
Answer #1 Because emissions of so-called greenhouse gases are trapping more and more of the incoming solar radiation, resulting in increasing global mean temperature and more variability in climatic behaviors. This is the level where the current focus is directed.
Why #2 Why are these gases causing a problem now when they have been getting into the atmosphere for a long time?
Answer #2 Because levels of human consumption and production have increased to the extent that more greenhouse gases are emitted than can be absorbed and removed, so that levels have been rising, essentially from the beginning of the industrial revolution in England in the 1800’s. This is where SCORAI is focused.
Why #3 Why has industrial production and consumption increased so much?
Answer #3 This answer has two parts. 1. Because population has been growing exponentially, rising from about 1.5 billion in the mid 1800’s to about 7.5 billion today and has been projected to reach 9 to 10 billion by 2100, both levels that far exceed the Earth’s capacity to support modern, developed human settlements. 2. Because people have become richer and demand more material goods.
At this point, the scheme has to bifurcate because the two parts have different root cause pathways, but, curiously end up at the same place.
Pathway 1: Excess Population
Why #4 Why has population growth exceeding the carrying capacity of the Planet?
Answer #4. Humans are animals, and are subject to the same natural laws that govern population dynamics of other species in ecological systems. The most basic law is that population levels beyond some sustainable limit are unstable and will crash at some time. For other than human species, populations are maintained at sustainable levels by predators, disease, and the availability of food. For humans, none of these three factors are relevant. Humans are at the very top of the predator chain and have no predators beside other humans acting in times of war and domestic violence. Diseases still do kill humans, but have largely been brought under control through medication and vaccination. The present pandemic is severe, but will not make a significant dent in global population levels—total global death are currently around 1,500,000 with a vaccine on the way. The major factor in allowing population to exceed some safe limit is the availability of food. Malthus’s dire prediction has been overturned by modern agricultural methods that permit sufficient food production to feed all the people on Earth. Distribution of this supply is uneven, however, so that poorer societies have shorter and less healthy lives.
Population growth is not uniform with higher rates correlated with poorer societies. Affluent societies approach or attain replacement level after some level of wealth has been reached. Population growth levels, as measured by the difference between birth and deaths per capita, in the poorest countries are around 4 times that of the United States. China and the United States are about the same. Most of the continued growth occurs in these poorer countries. About half the global population is at or less than replacement rate. Poorer countries still have very high rates relative to replacement, e.g., many African countries are a 5-6 times the replacement rate. The Chinese one-child policy was located at this level, but had its roots in the level that follows.
Why #5 Why are some countries far exceeding replacement rates?
Answer #5. The simplest answer to this question is poverty. The connection between population growth and wealth is quite strong and is being demonstrated in the two largest nations on the Planet. China has already attained replacement and India is approaching it. With a very short life span due to disease, war and famine, families in poor countries have more children, in part to maintain the species and in part to assure adequate labor for the survivors. Birth control is relatively unavailable and educational levels so low as to render it ineffective. International reliefs effort mitigate these causes somewhat, especially in eradicating traditional sources of endemic diseases, but may have perverse effects by lengthening life span without reducing birth rates. Current aid programs are far too little to mitigate the maldistribution in affluence.
Why #6 Why are some societies so poor and other so rich? (Because the Earth System is so complex and interconnected, it has taken more than five “whys” to get to this point.)
Answer #6. Again the answer has multiple aspects but most can be traced to the dominance of the left-brain. The left-brain seeks to control the world and has been very successful in doing this, as evidenced by the rise of affluence globally. It is behind the growth of scientific and technological knowledge with which the productive structures of modern cultures are erected. It is also behind the colonial imperatives that impoverished much of those societies that remain very poor. Conversely, the role of the connected right-hemisphere has been reduced, dimming recognition of the connectedness of all humans as a species and our species interconnections to and dependence on the global eco-system.
We are one of a few so-called (by the sociobiologist E. O. Wilson) eu-social species, able to co-operate in manifold ways, mediated by our linguistic capabilities. It is likely that this characteristic of H. sapiens was instrumental in our development to become the dominant species on Earth. But the right hemisphere of the brain and our caring nature has shrunk to the point that cultural sub-species, defined by national boundaries, races, religions and other delimiting traits, cannot recognize that the ties that bind us together and to the earth are critical to our survival. (See Iain McGilchrist, The Master and His Emissary)
Climate change and global poverty in a world of vast riches is a classic cases of the tragedy of the commons. The wealthy, left-brain societies see no end to the wealth that is available by exploiting the global commons, and have constructed political economies around continued growth as the keystone. The left-brain, in individuals and in a metaphoric collective sense applied to societies and institutions, cannot apprehend complexity and fails to account for the internal interconnectedness that is producing the very problems that are being faced. The modern left-brain tends to homogenize or commoditize people and ecosystems and fail to account for the variations that actually drive system behavior.
Pathway 2: Material Consumption
Why #4. Why do people in developed countries want evermore material goods?
Answer#4 Because major political economical institutions reflect norms and beliefs based on the Smithian/Maslovian model of human nature that argues that people are insatiable need-satisfying creatures. This belief underlies neoclassical economics and drives economic policy in every industrialized and industrializing nation. Nobody is paying any attention to this level. Technology, policy, and cultural norms are continuing to strengthen the collective left-brain.
Why #5 Why are people needy?
Answer #5 Because the left-brain hemisphere has taken charge and runs modern, industrial consumption-based societies. Modern, industrialized societies are fundamental left-brained and ignore the systemic consequences of growth. The left-brain demands certainty and believes it can provide it by using technological and technocratic means to control and manipulate the social and natural worlds.
Why #6 Why has the left-brain taken over?
Answer #6. Because since the beginning of modernity, from the Enlightenment onward, literacy and science have built the power of the left-brain at the expense of the right. Awareness of and attention to the connection between people and the natural system have diminished as the right-brain’s role has been fading. The subjugation of the empathetic, caring aspect of human “nature” has paralleled the growth of the analytic, detached left brain.
Conclusion:
This is where the chain of why’s ends and points to the place where permanent remedies for climate change and other system threats must start. The Earth System in which all the issues discussed here take place is complex with manifold interconnections between human institutions and the natural system. One reason that most analyses stop at the first or second question is that the dominant left brain deals very poorly with complexity and always wants to take things out of context so that it can work with a simple linear cause-effect way of solving problems.
Climate change cannot be effectively addressed without attending to both branches of this simple, but powerful, root-cause analysis. Ultimately, the solution rests in restoring the brain’s balance so that the connectedness of the right brain will not allow the left to ignore the roots of the matter. If and when the right-brain takes the reins, humans will spend more time nurturing relations with others and with the non-human world than looking for things to consume beyond what they need to exercise their caring half. Technology will and should play a role in holding off the tipping point when the instability grows beyond our capability to cope long enough to allow the cognitive shift to take place, but must not become the primary path to success.
The affluent world is clearly more responsible for the present threat level and has the means to reduce it, but any significant move will take a paradigmatic shift in mindset. We have known this ever since the publication of Our Common Future (the Brundtland Report), but have yet to take it seriously. The richer nations continue to grow, not yet sustainably by any measure, and have left the poorer ones to struggle with the insidious effects of wide-spread, systemic poverty on the Planet.
The complexity of the situation does not permit precise predictions so it is impossible to treat this as a simple, but complicated problem, addressable by the usual analytic frameworks. Yet that is what almost all conversation about climate change is based on. The right-brain is telling us to begin at the bottom level right now.
******************************************************************
Flourishing,
not sustainability, is the
right vision for the future. Order
my new book: The Right Way to Flourish: Reconnecting with the Real World .
Visit my website.John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421 781) 861-0363
Tom Walker wrote on 12/12/22 11:42 PM:
Can anyone tell me why the current system is contradictory?
******************************************************************
Flourishing,
not sustainability, is the
right vision for the future. Order
my new book: The Right Way to Flourish: Reconnecting with the Real World .
Visit my website.John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421; (617) 699-1772
John Ehrenfeld
People responding normally to institutions, small and large. Even to the institutional structure of societies, in which other institutions are nested. Anthony Giddens' structuration theory provides a useful frame in understanding what kind of rules and resources create what would be deemed "normal" behaviors: going shopping, watching certain kinds of sporting events, voting, for example (In the US). Only people behave. We may attribute some behavior to a reified entity, like a business, but it is only the people that actually behave/act. Companies may have been given a voice in the US, legally, but, in actuality, only people are acting. Their acts produce what may be seen as a company's behavior. If you change the way the employees think about the world, the organization's "behavior" will also change. Giddens argues persuasively ( for me) that there is a dialectic relationship between individual and institutional behaviors.
Robert Rattle wrote on 12/13/22 11:22 AM:
John,You say below: "Both outcomes are the result of normal behavior". What do you mean by "normal behavior"? Are you speaking of people, system(s), or one in response to the other?Thanks
--
-
Ruben Nelson
Hi John, (and all),
Thank you for this piece and your life’s work.
I want to test my understanding of your insights and of where they take me.
As I follow your logic, I see you drawing these conclusions, although not in this language:
1. The deepest source of our troubles is that we who are Modern Techno-Industrial (MTI) persons in MTI cultures have inherited and been formed by cultures which develop us as half-brained persons in half-brained cultures. For official purposes and in official places we are left-brained. On our own time and space we can be right-brained if we like that kind of thing. Do not bring a whole person, with a whole brain to work in any official sector of our MTI economies/societies.
2. The price we who are MTI persons in MTI cultures must pay in order to become truly sustainable is that we must evolve into whole-brained persons who are consciously participating in the co-creation of cultures which both express and reinforce a whole-brained sense of reality and life.
At this point at least two questions arise for me:
A. Is the work of becoming, evolving into, full-brained persons and cultures compatible with our MTI form of civilization and the MTI cultures which exemplify it? Can we who are MTI persons in MTI cultures become whole-brained as long as we continue to embrace and even reinforce our formation as MTI persons in MTI cultures?
B. If the answer to A is “no”, then does this imply that the work of becoming sustainable is less about the kind of technical fixes now being pursued in order to improved and extend our MTI ways of being and living and far more about engaging in what for our species is an utterly new kind of work, namely, consciously and reflexively learning to understand and transcend our MTI formation as persons, groups and cultures as we seek to evolve into whole-brained persons, living in cultures which consciously express and reinforce a new form of civilization – one that is whole-brained?
As I read you, your answer to A is “no,” and to B is “yes.”
If this is the case, then I conclude that we are in both deeper and quite different trouble as MTI cultures than we now think we are. As I read the official elements of our MTI cultures, including much that is undertaken in the name of “sustainability”, we answer question A with “Yes”. Therefore, we do not ever raise question B.
If this is the case, then mostly we are spinning our wheels. We have activity, but little in the way of motion towards a truly sustainable world.
If the above is at all sound, then it seems to me that we should add “our MTI ways of knowing, seeing, thinking and being” to our lists of “existential threats” to the future of humanity and so much that we love.
Sadly, this item is not on any such list or on the agenda of any significant institution, at least not that I know of.
Nate Hagens talks of us being “energy blind.” It appears to me that we are also blind to the reality you have been trying to get us to see – that the roots of our troubles lie in the soil provided by our MTI form of civilization – the only form of civilization to date which lacks an integral sense of the human brain, human persons and life. Therefore, we do not see that the core work of the 21st Century is not to improve and extend our MTI cultures by making them to be sustainable. Rather, it is to transcend our formation and consciously participate in the co-creation of the next form of human civilization. In short, we need a major change of imagination and the focus of our work.
Does this make sense?
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
Flourishing, not sustainability, is the right vision for the future.
John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421 781) 861-0363
Tom Walker wrote on 12/12/22 11:42 PM:
Can anyone tell me why the current system is contradictory?
Flourishing, not sustainability, is the right vision for the future.
John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421; (617) 699-1772
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
- Join SCORAI: https://scorai.net/join
- Submit an item to next newsletter: daniel...@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/963c2463-f87e-083a-70b8-d7dc64ec51aa%40gmail.com.
Tom Abeles
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/001801d90f2c%24480c3ec0%24d824bc40%24%40shaw.ca.
Tom Walker
Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
John Ehrenfeld
John
Ruben Nelson wrote on 12/13/22 2:51 PM:
Flourishing,
not sustainability, is the right vision for the future.
John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421 781) 861-0363
Tom Walker wrote on 12/12/22 11:42 PM:Can anyone tell me why the current system is contradictory?
Flourishing,
not sustainability, is the right vision for the future.
John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421; (617) 699-1772
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
- Join SCORAI: https://scorai.net/join
- Submit an item to next newsletter: daniel...@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/963c2463-f87e-083a-70b8-d7dc64ec51aa%40gmail.com.
Ruben Nelson
John,
I agree… and thank you.
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
Tom Abeles
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/f70fa29e-9590-3831-309d-468afe0349bb%40gmail.com.
David Chittenden
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAC0ykQFETN_i%3DCdDUufNMBGYkz57_TBF2Env1Hws%2BvwqLnMWAQ%40mail.gmail.com.
David Chittenden
Tom Walker
Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
dvskasper
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAFprfrUhM3x5szC4e1GnPnCb0KyHYagu8VYM5ho3tjOYYVVUYg%40mail.gmail.com.
Richard Rosen
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAPVm41fwUUJtCpM_gOcaCvN4rsSUdk0wv3zCQMTWtjGOhU4_1w%40mail.gmail.com.
Joe Zammit-Lucia
Maybe it might be wise to define what you mean by capitalism seeing as it comes in various forms and has proven incredibly flexible (and therefore resilient).
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAMZghTbepQCgGpGfZ03z8yaHbpM8NY-RBv%2BbOrxbuLRPzBhp_g%40mail.gmail.com.
Philip Vergragt
SCORAI working groups?
Dear all,
The recent contributions by Debbie, David, and others on spirituality; and by Rich and others on capitalism gave me the idea that maybe we should form small working groups or discussion groups to explore these issues more in depth. Discussions on the listserv are great, but they tend to diverse easily and are often a mix of thoughtful research and off- the cuff ideas, which can be frustrating sometimes.
What about the following:
-a discussion/ working group on spirituality, sufficiency and consumption/ consumerism
-a discussion group on capitalism, degrowth, sufficiency and consumption/ consumerism
The KAN SSCP has a working group on Political Economy of SCP; they published a paper: Manu V. Mathai; Cindy Isenhour; Dimitris Stevis; Philip Vergragt; Magnus Bengtsson; Sylvia Lorek; Lars Fogh Mortensen; Luca Coscieme; David Scott; Ambreen Waheed; Eva Alfredsson. 2021. The Political Economy of (Un)Sustainable Production and Consumption: A Multidisciplinary Synthesis for Research and Action. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2021 (Vol 167) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105265
As you see there is/ could be overlap between these areas, but they have clearly a different core subject.
I would be interested in a membership of either of these groups
The group could present itself on the listserv, Newsletter, and website; could have 1-2 monthly on-line meetings, and could discuss their own agendas; and maybe report some of their first findings at the upcoming SCORAI conference. This may be the right moment: propose a discussion session at the conference (closing date January 15); organize a few meetings before the conference, and discuss preliminary outcomes at the conference.
Who is stepping forward to take the lead?
Warm regards,
Philip
PS the current working group Trans Covid was created in a similar way before the previous SCORAI conference; presented its initial papers at the conference in 2020, which resulted in a book: Fabián Echegaray, Valerie Brachya, Philip J. Vergragt, Lei Zhang, (April 2021) Sustainable Lifestyles after Covid-19 Sustainable Lifestyles after Covid-19 - 1st Edition - Fabián Echegar (routledge.com) (Routledge)
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAMZghTbepQCgGpGfZ03z8yaHbpM8NY-RBv%2BbOrxbuLRPzBhp_g%40mail.gmail.com.
Tom Walker
Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
Ashwani Vasishth
Ashwani Vasishth
Ruben Nelson
Philip,
Yes, we need a discussion group on these matters.
My strong preference is for a single discussion group. That way we will be forced to wrestle with cross disciplinary, cross cultural and cross civilizational perspectives. I finds that when discussions focus on either spirituality or capitalism alone, they then to do so in the traditional terms already well established in the academy. The results tend to be sterile and mind-numbing. We get unconscious MTI in and unconscious MTI out. More of this will not help us to understand the depths and nature of the trouble we are in. We need to wrestle with spirituality and capitalism in the same space. We may discover that the root issues are ontological and epistemic.
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
Tom Walker
Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
Jean Boucher
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CANz%2BBQwgva0nbaEQbUMGK55u9yAVtNKHyQx1aS75x2SSb7Gevg%40mail.gmail.com.
JOHN DE GRAAF,* JOHN DE GRAAF
John de Graaf
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CA%2BsiMmjTB3LueSjFoTN4tr7jLZUTRSTZeaZ57QuVFO4vf%2BtyuQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Ruben Nelson
Jean,
In what follows, if I have mis-read you, please set me straight.
You sound to me like most well-educated, Modern folks. You appear to presume/assume/are committed to the view that your understanding of 1st Enlightenment science is the only standard by which reliable knowing can be tested. If that is your state of mind, then by definition, understandably, of course you will not venture beyond the limits your understanding of science sets. To do wo would be unfaithful to the best that you know. To do so would be to engage in foolishness. This stance also implies that anyone who colours outside your lines is simply wrong. The possibility that what we need to learn lies beyond the present boundaries of 1st Enlightenment science cannot be entertained. There is no chance we are wrong.
To my ears this means that no truly interesting conversations can take place. When it come to the survival of the human species, I have found that most of the truly interesting conversation lie beyond what our Modern Techno-Industrial (MTI) thinks its knows to be THE TRUTH. It is also the case that I can remember when I too was so faithful to my own formation as a brighter than average MTI male who could not learn beyond the boundaries set by our MTI form of civilization. But I have found that the learning is worth the embarrassment entailed.
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
Xanat Meza
Xanat V. Meza
Ph.D. Kansei, Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Yeungnam University
B.D. Graphic Communication Design
Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana
JOHN DE GRAAF,* JOHN DE GRAAF
John de Graaf
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/027401d914d8%24e2739f60%24a75ade20%24%40shaw.ca.
David Chittenden
Hi again all,
I'd just like to respond to some mis-understandings being expressed about meditation, and perhaps about what I proposed. I'd also like to thank Debbie for pointing out some of the obstacles with uptake of my proposal which I entirely agree with.
Firstly, meditation - through an analogy. If a scientist produces a flawed study, the solution is better science, not throwing science out as not useful. If we want that scientist who produced the flawed study to improve their science, they need a supportive community who have the requisite guidance and reference points to help them improve. It's the same for meditation.
John you identified that "For some, meditation is very useful; I know others for whom it is an escape from action on the problems we face, and they seem to go further and further into themselve instead of reaching out. They are always "working on" themselves when the real work is in the world. They are often too busy in their inward search to even have time for friends and conversation. This kind of sprituality is quite abstract really and whollly individualistic. " I completely agree that those people exist. These people are using meditation as an escape probably because it can produce pleasant experiences that they crave, and they are avoiding other sides of themselves or life due to it being uncomfortable. Given the subjective nature of first-person experience and the way our brain and 'ego' can trick us, this a not uncommon trap which people cannot recognise themselves in until it's pointed out - I think it is called spiritual materialism. You also said that it's abstract and individualistic. I agree, your example is. There is a common perception that meditation is a solitary activity and while it can be, traditionally it's done in groups (sangha, meaning community). I meditate in a group every week and there are group meditation retreats almost everywhere. In groups we discuss teachings, meditate, discuss our experiences and offer guidance. The community is where reference points are, the teachers and texts, the real-world relationships and the need to get by in the world, to keep people from practicing 'bad science' (to use my analogy above).
John, you also said "On the other hand, for some, meditation shuts out the noise of the consumer society and gives them the ability to act outwardly in the world." Also "I respectfully suggest that turning outward to a beautiful world may help more than turning inward in meditation. Just my take." Both are misunderstandings of meditation and how meditation helps us engage with the world. Contrary to what many believe, meditation is a process of opening up to both what is going on inside us and outside us. As Debbie said earlier, it is about trying to understand the nature of reality. So mediation doesn't 'shut out' anything or turn inward at the expense of the outer. A person may then decide to let in what is useful and shut out or limit other things so they can engage in the world productively, but that is after meditation. Meditation is training for engaging in the world, not a goal in itself. Experienced meditation practitioners are able to have stable awareness where they simultaneously are aware of inner and outer worlds without distraction or being 'captured' by anything in particular, and are therefore able to respond appropriately to the world. Sound too good to be true? That's what I used to think too :)
John, you proposed "re-enchantment of the natural world" and I completely agree. Again the question of 'how' comes in, and I would again point to meditation as one possible way in. Meditation is often done in beautiful natural places because of the synergies. An awareness of the raw experience of our existence with an understanding of what Thích Nhất Hạnh (the well-known Vietnamese monk) called 'interbeing' shows us that we are not separate from the natural world, or each other. When we look at anything with open curiosity, without judgement or concepts it usually becomes both more beautiful and mysterious. (I looked at a stalk of asparagus in detail the other day and it was as if I had never seen one before - it's beautiful. And it shows how we usually operate at a utilitarian level - I had handled that asparagus a number of times - at the shop, in and out of bags, in and out of the fridge, in preparation, in cooking and eating - without ever really engaging with it.)
What I proposed was one possible part of addressing the root causes previously identified, not a panacea. It would need to be combined with many other things. I suggested meditation combined with the analytical and ethical frameworks that are in Buddhist traditions because that is where I believe some genuine wisdom lies. I also think much of the teaching and techniques need to be modernised and made more accessible and much that is unnecessary or untested stripped away. That is already happening on many fronts, but I believe we also need to be careful to not throw out the baby with the bathwater. There is a lot that is lost by singling out 'mindfulness' and turning it into another 'executive stress ball' (as Sam Harris says). A vulture capitalist who meditates will likely become a more effective vulture capitalist without reference to an ethical framework and a clear understanding of their actions' effect on a community they are embedded in. I'm interested in exploring some avenues that when embedded appropriately in society MAY pose useful in addressing the root causes rather than looking for perfect 'solutions' (which don't exist). There are also other places where wisdom (not just knowledge) exists, such as indigenous cultures.
Jean - you raised a great challenge about evidence for "spirituality, buddhist meditation, or right-brained-ness is associated with walking a little lighter on this planet." I haven't studied this and would be interested to hear of any. It's a much bigger discussion but 'spirituality' can be a problematic word/concept. There are certainly religious people who would claim to be spiritual but have a rather destructive effect on society and the natural world.
Philip - thanks for the practical suggestion of SCORAI working groups - perhaps that is a useful way forward. I'm not sure that singling out spirituality is the way to go though. I think most white 'westerners' tend to think that spirituality is something they can consider after they have paid the bills and put the kids to bed, and so it would likely be side-lined, whereas I understand that most indigenous cultures consider it to be an inseparable part of everything. As Xanat Meza said, we "need to listen to indigenous, black and minorities folk".
All the best
David
Jean Boucher
John Ehrenfeld
It is very important to keep clear the distinction between spirituality and religion. Religion is an institution, like any other, and is constituted by its structure of rules and resources (Debby, I continue to use Giddens's model, as it helps explain institutional behavior quite well.). Spirituality refers to personal experiences that transcend normal ones. Explanations, if any can be found, must rely on faith since they cannot be reasonably argued. Transcendent experiences arise when one is connected to the immediate world and the constant chatter about what to do right now is quiescent. For the curious, it raises questions about the cosmos outside of the realm of science, questions dealing with meaning about life and its place in the cosmos. For the uncurious, it is a call to religion where a explanation might be provided.
For the curious, there is a way to explore the sense that there is more to know about the world than science can provide, called pragmatism. It involves careful observations of the context-rich world and a cognitive process, named abduction by Peirce. He wrote, “[a]abduction is the process of forming explanatory hypotheses. It is the only logical operation which introduces any new idea.” Pragmatism reveal "beliefs" or "truths" about the real world that science cannot because science is always just looking at a piece of it. Whereas science has a standard of "truthfulness," pragmatism does not. The proof is only in the pudding. The correctness of what emerges from pragmatic inquiry can be known only by observing the results of applying any new understanding. (I use understanding, not knowledge, to maintain the distinction between what is uncovered pragmatically from scientific findings.)
Others and I have been arguing that the mess we are in is the result of our normal behaviors within the institutions of modern societies, including the belief that science will give us the facts on which we can solve all our problems and design these institutions to get us want we want. Treatments like wicked problems, Ackoff's messes, systems dynamics archetypes, at least, relate to this explanation of the mess we are in. So does the divided-brain-model, in spades. That's why I invoke it. Spirituality (not religion), and pragmatism are cognitive processes that are "run" by the right-hemisphere, and rely on its being connected, via the senses, to the immediate world. Normal science is the epitome of left-hemisphere re-cognition, using facts (beliefs, etc) to control behavior, but so is all routine or habitual behavior. All three of these categories constitute the normality that has generated the unintended consequences that all of us on this listserver care about.
Einstein said it in several different ways. One is about doing things over and over again (normality) and expecting them to turn out differently is insanity. Another is the impossibility of solving our problems with the same things that created them. Science will not discover or eliminate the root causes of our messes. It can help, perhaps, in giving us time to discover a better path forward. We have a better shot at identifying the path through practices like pragmatic inquiry and meditation, both of which quiet the left-hemisphere, and connect us to the real world. There is no way we are going to think our way out of this mess, but we can try to find it, otherwise. And that will take a lot of time and there is no certainty that we will find the "right" way. Pragmatic inquiry can never do more than offer possibilities. Certainty belongs only to the theories held in the left-hemisphere.
Modernity, with its belief in science and extreme levels of literacy, has resulted in a highly left-hemisphere dominated culture, that reflects the way the individual brain has developed. Our species is, appropriately, named Homo sapiens or Home economicus. At times over our history on Earth, the balance of the hemispheres was the opposite. We might have been called Home curitans, caring humans, because our behaviors would accounted for the "needs" of the actual world of living and inanimate things, not some replica stored in our brains. Indigenous cultures still demonstrate more of such behaviors than our modern, so called civilized, cultures. What I have been arguing is that such caring behaviors, rather that the routines and habits based on the left-brain's instrumental view of the planet, would, possibly, avoid creating such dreadful unintended consequences.I do not see another such possibility at this moment. Just as humans have changed the Planet, as we are now close to designating a new geologic period, the Anthropocene, we can create a new species by deliberately re-designing our dominant self (ontological design) and our institutions to energize that caring self. Can we, really, only time will tell, but, if any of you have a better plan, let us know. Just imagine what the world might be like if humans cared for one another and the Planet, rather than acting as if these were merely objects to be used somehow.
ps. Yes, capitalism is certainly at issue, but simply as a set of beliefs and norms, that has produced the unintended consequences underlying all the messes we face. Something new is necessary, but we cannot think of what it is because that is how we got into this mess. Critical thinking about capitalism or any other ism might help us get started, but that is as far as it will take us. We have to try out new ways of being together. Philip and Halina wrote a piece a long time ago about the importance of small-scale social experiments. That seems like a good place to start as we all seem to agree that the possibility for significant change in the present political economies of the modern world is vanishingly small.
Jean Boucher wrote on 12/21/22 7:01 AM:
JOHN DE GRAAF,* JOHN DE GRAAF
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAFprfrXLyS7tXf2i1LrT0kUZtSofx239skTS6FEEhoSRF_SF9w%40mail.gmail.com.
Ruben Nelson
John,
Thank you.
I understand your comment, and much of your work, as trying to nudge us to learn to take a meta-perspective on our Modern Techno-Industrial (MTI) selves, our MTI cultures and our world which is now largely shaped by MTI understandings and visions. The point, as I understand it, is to learn stand apart from our formation as MTI persons in MTI cultures enough to realize that all homo sapiens, including us, live within a reality that, writ large, is ambiguous enough to be experienced in profoundly different ways; that the MTI way of experiencing and responding to reality is only one of the ways our species has develop over our 300,000 year journey; that our MTI ways of knowing and responding to reality are only that – one of the ways of experiencing and interpreting the universe as homo sapiens; that the question of the “fitness” of our whole MTI form of civilization now needs to be on the table in any conversation having to do with the sustainability of human cultures; that at this level there is no way of testing the adequacy of a given way of experiencing, being present in and responding to reality other than by its truly long-term (tens of thousands of years) sustainability and the degree to which its societies, communities and persons thrive. Sadly, these measures are themselves somewhat ambiguous and beyond the ken of a single, or even a few, generations. Tragically, the evidence is piling us that today MTI cultures are neither sustainable nor fit for human thriving.
Three further comments.
At this level of the “game” (Wittgenstein’s use of the term) it turns out that the quality of our knowing is directly related to the quality of the culture that has formed us and our qualities as persons. In short, knowing reliably at this level is a deeply personal and communal activity. In this work, the impersonal “objective” stance of MTI science does not work. Therefore, Jean is quite right that my earlier comments moved to include him as a person. Of course, they also includes me. My intention was, and is, not to take a shot at him, but to prod him to engage him in a conversation that deepens our understanding of the mess of complex living messes we are in.
If there is anything in this line of reasoning, then a conclusion which jumps out of it is this: the deepest existential threat to life on this planet may well be the core character of the MTI way of presenting ourselves to, experiencing, understanding, knowing and responding to reality. I note that this threat is not yet on any of the growing number of lists of “existential threats/risks to humanity.” In short, we who are MTI persons and cultures still appear to be fully confident that it is safe and sane to use and trust our MTI ways of grasping and responding to reality as we seek to increase the sustainability of our cultures and the degree to which they enable us to thrive. This is the bet we are making. Sadly, we do not yet know we have bet our lives and our grandchildren’s future on a perspective we have yet to understand, let alone test for adequacy.
As I understand him, John and I are among a small but growing number of others who seek to nurture a conversation that we see to be central to the human predicament; a conversation that, at best, today is on the fringe of our imagination, our interests, our research programs, our budgets and our cultural commitments. We are trying to be heard to say that Einstein’s quip about not being able to deal with troubling conditions with the same level of thinking which created them fully applies to our MTI form of civilization. If at all the case, then much of what is today a multi-billion dollar sustainability industry needs to be re-imagined, re-formulated and re-cast as a journey that is personal-to-civilizational in depth and scope. The longer we remain faithful to our formation as MTI persons and cultures, the more we put our future, and that of much that we love, at risk.
I realize that this perspective will sound outrageous to those who have not yet dipped their toes in these waters. In time, it can be experienced as the best “bad news” we have ever heard.
I have attached two quotes which sustain me on the journey to ways of being and living. (Disclosure: I was privileged to know Wilf Smith as a mentor and friend.)
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
Tom Walker
But I suspect that the real antidote to consumerism is the re-enchantment of the natural world..."
Ruben Nelson
John,
I write not to convince you, but to explain myself to you and others who are puzzled/annoyed.
I understand that it is next to impossible to engage with a person you do not know by a listserv about views of our situation that, at best, is new and strange to your ears. I also understand that I have not done what is taken for granted for admission into the academy -- set out my perspective in refereed literature in a clear and simple way. Given just these two factors it is easy to misunderstand and write off what I struggle to say.
To begin, I am saying what many others now agree on – that our MTI form of civilization is headed for a dead end. We have no long-term future as MTI persons, institution, economies and cultures. For good and ill, MTI cultures entail the “cannibalization” of the planet and living things, including humans. No matter how you try to square this circle, the result is the same. Ecological overshoot is a feature, not a bug. No amount of “sustainability” work will save MTI cultures as MTI cultures. MTI cultures are already into a longish disintegration and collapse. (Collapse, a la Joe Tainter, is caused by the inability to maintain the levels of complexity previously achieved.) As Bill Rees and others have shown, the best science of today can, and has, determined this. (I note that “the best science today” is actually breaking many of the established rules of what was taken as “good” science as recently as the 1950s. Sadly, this is the case in many places. But that inquiry can wait.)
In my mind, the next question is this: Within what frames of reference do we process and respond to the above insights about the time-limited nature of MTI cultures?
I observe that, perfectly understandably, most MTI scientists say, in effect, that “the best of our MTI science has led us to these insights, so it must be reasonable to continue to use the best MTI science to plumb the depths of the messes we are in and find a way through them. Let’s get on with it.” The sustainability industry makes sense in this light. The demands you set out in your third paragraph as the proper way to proceed reflect this assumption.
But I am not playing the established MTI game.
The architype of what I am saying is actually very familiar in human history. Both mothers and prophets say, “If you continue to be who you have become, things will not end well for you.” Note that they are not merely saying, “if you continue to behave the way you are now behaving, things will end badly.” They see a deeper root of your troubles. It is in the way your character is now formed. This does not mean that there is no way out. It does mans that there is no way out “if you maintain your present character (and all that that entails,).” The italics are critical. In short, the way our entails learning to see what you have become, owning up to it, regretting it and engaging in a re-formation of your deepest character. The Greek word for this is ‘metanoia’.
This is what I am saying to us as MTI persons in MTI cultures. “We have no future as MTI persons in MTI cultures. However, we know that new forms of human civilization can emerge in human history, because at least three forms have emerged: the small group Indigenous (hunter gatherer) form, the settled agriculture-based form and the MTI form. Therefore, in principle, it may be possible for those of us who are MTI persons in MTI cultures to put our body, heart, mind and spirits to the co-creation of the next form of human civilization. But if we do, we must come to terms with what we have become.” If the price we must pay for a future in which life thrives is to engage in personal-to-civilizational transcendence (P2CT) then so be it.
So the question I wrestle with becomes, “How do we learn to work with, support, assist the new work of enabling persons and institutions in MTI cultures to see the need to cooperate with their own evolution as they willingly outgrow their MTI selves at every scale from the personal to civilizational?”
And to do this knowing that to undertake such work we cannot simply rely on even the best of our MTI ways of knowing. Rather, we must develop our personal and community capacity for reflexivity and even meta-reflexivity which enables us to see and wrestle with the deep unconscious patterns which define the MTI form of civilization. Without this new capacity, we will likely do something we who are MTI are really good at – inventing a “new” innovation which we declare to be a new paradigm, when in fact all we have done is repaint the barn and call it a new building.
At the least, I am asking, “How much of our efforts at becoming sustainable are trying to hold on to, rescue, redeem our MTI ways of being and living and how much is clear eyed about the need and the possibility of transcending who we now are and what we have now become?”
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
JOHN DE GRAAF,* JOHN DE GRAAF
John de Graaf
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/016801d91578%24fc1c6b40%24f45541c0%24%40shaw.ca.
Ian Hamilton
As a non-academic in this space, there is not much that I feel prepared to share on either the vastness or specificity of preceding discussions. However, as a quasi-practitioner at the interface of religion/spirituality, environment and development, there are some thoughts that come to mind:
I think that the recent discussion confirms the wisdom in Philip’s suggestion to form a discussion/working group on spirituality, sufficiency and consumption/consumerism. I would certainly be happy to act as a convenor/focal point for such a group.
If one is to accept the rhetoric that the climate crisis and impending environmental collapse require a “whole of society response” then it is clear that a plurality of opinions, theories and practices will need to be considered and certain points of unity (be it in thought, action, policy etc) established that allow us to, indeed, work as a whole of society. In essence, to move from othering one another to building bonds of belonging will be key in mobilizing increasing numbers to exert less pressure on the planet.
At the same time, to reduce the concepts of religion and spirituality to the practice of meditation or the relative “sustainability” of one movement as compared to another is simply that, reductive. There are those who contend that religion is a system or source of knowledge complementary to scientific inquiry. Where science develops the capabilities to observe, measure and rigorously test ideas, religion can provide the moral and spiritual frameworks that guide or influence behavior. And while we have excelled in attaching value to things like fossil fuels, labor and so on we seem to have struggled to understand the worth of values such as sacrifice and justice as well as how to inculcate such values in people.
I don’t write any of this to defend or aggrandize the role of religion and spirituality, or to seek to influence thought one way or the other, but rather to suggest that perhaps there is fruitful territory here for exploration and the potential to create some shared understanding about a series of topics that are, at best, under-researched and discussed.
As I said, I would be very happy to convene a group to discuss the aforementioned topics so please do reach out to me directly if you have an interest in participating in such a working group.
Very best and wishing you all a restful end to the year,
Ian
Ian Hamilton | Environmental Discourse Officer
Office of Public Affairs | Baha’is of the United States
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1320 19th St. NW, Suite 701, Washington, D.C. 20036
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/016801d91578%24fc1c6b40%24f45541c0%24%40shaw.ca.
Ruben Nelson
Thank you for offering to serve. Your offer may well be taken up.
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
+1-403-609-1016
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
Sent: December 21, 2022 2:59 PM
To: ruben...@shaw.ca <mailto:ruben...@shaw.ca> ; 'JOHN DE GRAAF,*
JOHN DE GRAAF' <jo...@comcast.net <mailto:jo...@comcast.net> >; 'Jean Boucher'
<jlb...@gmail.com <mailto:jlb...@gmail.com> >; lumpo...@gmail.com
<mailto:lumpo...@gmail.com>
Cc: 'Philip Vergragt' <pver...@outlook.com <mailto:pver...@outlook.com>
>; richard...@gmail.com <mailto:richard...@gmail.com> ;
dvsk...@gmail.com <mailto:dvsk...@gmail.com> ; chitt...@gmail.com
<mailto:chitt...@gmail.com> ; tab...@gmail.com <mailto:tab...@gmail.com>
; johneh...@gmail.com <mailto:johneh...@gmail.com> ; 'SCORAI Group'
<sco...@googlegroups.com <mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com> >;
wr...@mail.ubc.ca <mailto:wr...@mail.ubc.ca> ; har...@msu.edu
<mailto:har...@msu.edu>
<mailto:jlb...@gmail.com> >; lumpo...@gmail.com
<mailto:lumpo...@gmail.com>
Cc: 'Philip Vergragt' <pver...@outlook.com <mailto:pver...@outlook.com>
>; richard...@gmail.com <mailto:richard...@gmail.com> ;
dvsk...@gmail.com <mailto:dvsk...@gmail.com> ; chitt...@gmail.com
<mailto:chitt...@gmail.com> ; tab...@gmail.com <mailto:tab...@gmail.com>
; johneh...@gmail.com <mailto:johneh...@gmail.com> ; 'SCORAI Group'
<sco...@googlegroups.com <mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com> >;
wr...@mail.ubc.ca <mailto:wr...@mail.ubc.ca> ; har...@msu.edu
<mailto:har...@msu.edu>
+1-403-609-1016
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
From: JOHN DE GRAAF,* JOHN DE GRAAF [mailto:jo...@comcast.net]
Sent: December 20, 2022 6:29 PM
<jlb...@gmail.com <mailto:jlb...@gmail.com> >; lumpo...@gmail.com
<mailto:lumpo...@gmail.com>
Cc: Philip Vergragt <pver...@outlook.com <mailto:pver...@outlook.com>
>; richard...@gmail.com <mailto:richard...@gmail.com> ;
dvsk...@gmail.com <mailto:dvsk...@gmail.com> ; chitt...@gmail.com
<mailto:chitt...@gmail.com> ; tab...@gmail.com <mailto:tab...@gmail.com>
; johneh...@gmail.com <mailto:johneh...@gmail.com> ; SCORAI Group
<sco...@googlegroups.com <mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com> >;
wr...@mail.ubc.ca <mailto:wr...@mail.ubc.ca> ; har...@msu.edu
<mailto:har...@msu.edu>
+1-403-609-1016
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
From: Jean Boucher [mailto:jlb...@gmail.com]
Sent: December 20, 2022 5:14 PM
Cc: Ruben Nelson <ruben...@shaw.ca <mailto:ruben...@shaw.ca> >;
Philip Vergragt <pver...@outlook.com <mailto:pver...@outlook.com> >;
richard...@gmail.com <mailto:richard...@gmail.com> ;
dvsk...@gmail.com <mailto:dvsk...@gmail.com> ; chitt...@gmail.com
<mailto:chitt...@gmail.com> ; tab...@gmail.com <mailto:tab...@gmail.com>
; johneh...@gmail.com <mailto:johneh...@gmail.com> ; SCORAI Group
<sco...@googlegroups.com <mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com> >;
wr...@mail.ubc.ca <mailto:wr...@mail.ubc.ca> ; har...@msu.edu
<mailto:har...@msu.edu>
+1-403-609-1016
Courageous Leadership for Transforming Change
From: Philip Vergragt [mailto:pver...@outlook.com
<mailto:pver...@outlook.com> ]
Sent: December 20, 2022 8:39 AM
dvsk...@gmail.com <mailto:dvsk...@gmail.com>
Cc: chitt...@gmail.com <mailto:chitt...@gmail.com> ; tab...@gmail.com
<mailto:tab...@gmail.com> ; johneh...@gmail.com
<mailto:johneh...@gmail.com> ; Ruben Nelson <ruben...@shaw.ca
<mailto:ruben...@shaw.ca> >; SCORAI Group <sco...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com> >; wr...@mail.ubc.ca
<mailto:wr...@mail.ubc.ca> ; har...@msu.edu <mailto:har...@msu.edu> ;
lumpo...@gmail.com <mailto:lumpo...@gmail.com>
Echegaray, <https://www.routledge.com/search?author=Valerie%20Brachya>
Valerie Brachya,
<https://www.routledge.com/search?author=Philip%20J.%20Vergragt> Philip J.
Vergragt, <https://www.routledge.com/search?author=Lei%20Zhang> Lei Zhang,
rachya-Vergragt-Zhang/p/book/9780367754099> Sustainable Lifestyles after
From: sco...@googlegroups.com <mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com>
<sco...@googlegroups.com <mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com> > On Behalf Of
Richard Rosen
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 9:20 AM
Cc: chitt...@gmail.com <mailto:chitt...@gmail.com> ; tab...@gmail.com
<mailto:tab...@gmail.com> ; johneh...@gmail.com
<mailto:johneh...@gmail.com> ; Ruben Nelson <ruben...@shaw.ca
<mailto:ruben...@shaw.ca> >; SCORAI Group <sco...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:sco...@googlegroups.com> >; wr...@mail.ubc.ca
<mailto:wr...@mail.ubc.ca> ; har...@msu.edu <mailto:har...@msu.edu> ;
lumpo...@gmail.com <mailto:lumpo...@gmail.com>
ain.net%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f6
40afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234070366%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8ey
JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7
C%7C&sdata=SoTED%2BHtpHQbqwvcPkb%2FYXu47Oiz7KsFhn7zq9yDZgk%3D&reserved=0>
.substack.com%2Fp%2Fenergy-blind&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae
29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234070366%7CUn
known%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJX
VCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fZQzppO2xmitsXRRhBjpwIGH2UFXfvih%2B6rXhDiA9
H8%3D&reserved=0> It appears to me that we are also blind to the reality
in the soil provided by our MTI form of civilization – the only form of
civilization to date which lacks an integral sense of the human brain, human
persons and life. Therefore, we do not see that the core work of the 21st
Century is not to improve and extend our MTI cultures by making them to be
sustainable. Rather, it is to transcend our formation and consciously
participate in the co-creation of the next form of human civilization. In
short, we need a major change of imagination and the focus of our work.
Does this make sense?
Ruben
Ruben F.W. Nelson
Executive Director
Foresight Canada
htcanada.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7
fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234070366%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb
3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000
%7C%7C%7C&sdata=X5jGdTJrBStm5q13bztiuFFYdf7qDeCBUhsqyxLtL1s%3D&reserved=0>
www.foresightcanada.com
+1-403-609-1016
my new book: The Right Way to Flourish: Reconnecting with the Real World .
Visit my website
enfeld.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe
9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234070366%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d
8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7
C%7C%7C&sdata=96J6Cc6u%2F9yBXfsBxQaC49epgdJ37Reqeiv2wL4OPiU%3D&reserved=0> .
John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421 781) 861-0363
Tom Walker wrote on 12/12/22 11:42 PM:
Can anyone tell me why the current system is contradictory?
******************************************************************
my new book: The Right Way to Flourish: Reconnecting with the Real World .
Visit my website
enfeld.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe
9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d
8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7
C%7C%7C&sdata=WqK8Afq4oPOlUr%2B88ZYtjFWSz3SCeF%2BsqjoQXRERgTI%3D&reserved=0>
.
John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421; (617) 699-1772
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb43
5aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM
C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
ata=jQHjhX1I3BVYBDu9qJnnWESEQyjgMB5W6%2B9REhpIyfw%3D&reserved=0>
%2Fjoin&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640a
fb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWI
joiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7
C&sdata=FSKXlPjwv%2B%2FGluZORFDSI%2FBeaPdtVnVCzGcmp4l9hdU%3D&reserved=0>
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu <mailto:hbr...@clarku.edu>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/963c2463-f87e-083a-70b8-d7dc64ec51a
a%40gmail.com
gle.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Fscorai%2F963c2463-f87e-083a-70b8-d7dc64ec51aa%2540gmai
l.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911b
cba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C6380714
28234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB
TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=rWQmWk6PBCwCD7Nv5omOeMxfQDH
%2B7GxLK58koGQ7aL4%3D&reserved=0> .
******************************************************************
my new book: The Right Way to Flourish: Reconnecting with the Real World .
Visit my website
enfeld.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe
9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d
8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7
C%7C%7C&sdata=WqK8Afq4oPOlUr%2B88ZYtjFWSz3SCeF%2BsqjoQXRERgTI%3D&reserved=0>
.
John R. Ehrenfeld 24 Percy Road, Lexington, MA 02421; (617) 699-1772
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb43
5aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM
C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
ata=jQHjhX1I3BVYBDu9qJnnWESEQyjgMB5W6%2B9REhpIyfw%3D&reserved=0>
%2Fjoin&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640a
fb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWI
joiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7
C&sdata=FSKXlPjwv%2B%2FGluZORFDSI%2FBeaPdtVnVCzGcmp4l9hdU%3D&reserved=0>
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu <mailto:hbr...@clarku.edu>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
b%40gmail.com
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.goo
gle.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Fscorai%2Ff70fa29e-9590-3831-309d-468afe0349bb%2540gmai
l.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911b
cba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C6380714
28234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB
TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=95QbIeSQ20WFqgIIp%2FDlG4w0S
X3ZsJKy2ajQhsB8JJ4%3D&reserved=0> .
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fscorai.net
%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb43
5aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM
C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
ata=jQHjhX1I3BVYBDu9qJnnWESEQyjgMB5W6%2B9REhpIyfw%3D&reserved=0>
%2Fjoin&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640a
fb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWI
joiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7
C&sdata=FSKXlPjwv%2B%2FGluZORFDSI%2FBeaPdtVnVCzGcmp4l9hdU%3D&reserved=0>
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu <mailto:hbr...@clarku.edu>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
2Env1Hws%2BvwqLnMWAQ%40mail.gmail.com.
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fscorai.net
%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb43
5aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM
C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
ata=jQHjhX1I3BVYBDu9qJnnWESEQyjgMB5W6%2B9REhpIyfw%3D&reserved=0>
%2Fjoin&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640a
fb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234226613%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWI
joiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7
C&sdata=FSKXlPjwv%2B%2FGluZORFDSI%2FBeaPdtVnVCzGcmp4l9hdU%3D&reserved=0>
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu <mailto:hbr...@clarku.edu>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
YM5ho3tjOYYVVUYg%40mail.gmail.com.
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fscorai.net
%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb43
5aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234382861%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM
C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
ata=b2hoEAU6RNGVZdeu%2FkrRH32M6%2B75ZfFrsj2cH8Ols0g%3D&reserved=0>
%2Fjoin&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640a
fb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234382861%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWI
joiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7
C&sdata=AGKLAW3lo7FTXe0gsAXn1YXb27BEFicnxVIeG8Q83zY%3D&reserved=0>
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu <mailto:hbr...@clarku.edu>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
zCQMTWtjGOhU4_1w%40mail.gmail.com.
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fscorai.net
%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb43
5aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234382861%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiM
C4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
ata=b2hoEAU6RNGVZdeu%2FkrRH32M6%2B75ZfFrsj2cH8Ols0g%3D&reserved=0>
%2Fjoin&data=05%7C01%7C%7C7cc35911bcba42fa392c08dae29549aa%7C84df9e7fe9f640a
fb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638071428234382861%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWI
joiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7
C&sdata=AGKLAW3lo7FTXe0gsAXn1YXb27BEFicnxVIeG8Q83zY%3D&reserved=0>
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu <mailto:hbr...@clarku.edu>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
%2BbOrxbuLRPzBhp_g%40mail.gmail.com.
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
- Join SCORAI: https://scorai.net/join
- Submit an item to next newsletter: daniel...@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu <mailto:hbr...@clarku.edu>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
yQx1aS75x2SSb7Gevg%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CANz%2BBQwgva0nbaEQbUMGK55u9yAVtNK
HyQx1aS75x2SSb7Gevg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
- Join SCORAI: https://scorai.net/join
- Submit an item to next newsletter: daniel...@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
24%40shaw.ca
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/027401d914d8%24e2739f60%24a75ade20
%24%40shaw.ca?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
- Join SCORAI: https://scorai.net/join
- Submit an item to next newsletter: daniel...@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com
24%40shaw.ca
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/016801d91578%24fc1c6b40%24f45541c0
%24%40shaw.ca?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> .
Tom Walker
Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
Robert Rattle
Dear Tom,Maybe a different way of looking at this is to ask whether it is reasonable to expect any system to be anything other than full of contradictions.As Daniel Kahneman puts it, he doesn't expect human behaviour to be in any way consistent. We all want many things that are mutually incompatible. That's how human beings work and it's a feature that can't be intellectualised away.In the end it boils down to priorities. The people on this list tend to put high priority on climate action - at least in words, discussion and public stance if not always, or maybe not even often, in our own personal behaviour. But that may not (in fact it does not) reflect the priorities of the broader population many of whom are much more worried about getting through the week than we are in our relatively privileged position. Others who are also privileged have other priorities too.For half a century, a whole movement has tried its best to push climate action to the very top of people's perceptions of priorities. It has failed. And carrying on with the same approach over and over is not going to lead anywhere.The difficult job of politics is to try to find a way forward when more or less everyone wants something different and when priorities change month by month depending on current circumstances.If we are to find a way forward, then we have to learn to live in that world and navigate our way through its messiness rather than fantasising about consistency and pure logic. Continuing with the framing that climate is the world's most existential threat and must therefore take priority over everything else puts us out of line with the diversity of opinion and the different priorities that are out there and have to be navigated. It therefore ends up leading to putative 'solutions' that are no solutions at all because they have no chance whatsoever of being implemented. And yet somehow it makes us feel better because we can pretend to know 'the answer' and can point the finger of blame to others for not doing what we say.More productive would be to ask the question of how do we move forward on climate change in a situation where, when it boils down to concrete actions, it is a relatively low priority for most people out there. If we can swallow that bitter pill, we have a much greater chance of coming up with practicable ideas.To Bill's comment: "So, to summarize: we often know what needs to be done but very few articles, including this latest one, detail exactly how we can overcome cultural inertia to actually implement policies that would make a real difference."
The reality is that we only 'know' what needs to be done within one particular framing - the importance and priority that WE put on climate action. Once we remove that crutch and put climate action lower down on the priority list for action (as it is for much of the population), then I suggest we really have little idea of what's to be done. Articles, studies and all the rest that come up with the various 'whats' but leave it at that - separated from the 'how' - are a sure sign that the 'what' we have come up with is not, in practice, very useful at all.BestJoe
On 13 Dec 2022 at 04:42 Tom Walker <lumpo...@gmail.com> wrote:Bill Rees wrote, "So, to summarize: we often know what needs to be done but very few articles, including this latest one, detail exactly how we can overcome cultural inertia to actually implement policies that would make a real difference."That sounds to me like evidence of a contradictory system. If we know the system is contradictory, do we know how it is contradictory or why? It would seem that understanding the contradiction of the system would be the first step of a definition of the problem if not of a solution,
Can anyone tell me why the current system is contradictory?
Cheers,
Tom Walker (Sandwichman)On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 2:23 PM 'Rees, William E.' via SCORAI <sco...@googlegroups.com> wrote:I agree that it is good to see Nature tackling the subject of degrowth and this is a good article by way of introducing some of its basic principles. However, there are major issues. Here are some reflections I just sent to another group that had introduced this article:
-------------------------------------------------------------
As with many good articles before it:
a) this paper is front- and back-end loaded with great suggestions about what should or could be done but virtually silent on how to get it done.b) the authors associate themselves with the 'degrowth' movement which has so-far eschewed consideration of the population question. This may be politically correct but is ecologically wrong-headed.
A single example of point 'a'. From the article:
"New forms of financing will be needed to fund public services without growth. Governments must stop subsidies for fossil-fuel extraction. They should tax ecologically damaging industries such as air travel and meat production. Wealth taxes can also be used to increase public resources and reduce inequality."
Agreed, absolutely!!
ButHow do we get governments to stop subsidies to unsustainable industries when politicians in many countries depend on affected corporations for their campaign funding and on those same corporations for jobs in their constituencies?How should we go about adequate eco-taxation (e.g., carbon taxes) which would move society closer to efficient full-cost pricing when any discussion of raising taxes is immediately squelched (there are huge problems in just getting adequate carbon pricing); when people are already pressed to the wall because of inflation, scarcity and other factors that raise the cost of living (keep in mind, environmental taxes are intended to raise costs/prices, by internalizing here-to-fore external costs, in order to reduce consumption) and; when true social cost pricing would likely put many goods now considered essential (cell-phones, EVs and flat-screened TVs, for example) beyond the budgets of consumers who now take them for granted? Most people wouldn't be able to fly at all when today the right to vacation in the sun is taken as a human right by many in rich northern countries!And by the way, the production of crops is arguably more damaging than for example, free-range grass-fed meat production. Tonnes of pesticides and fertilizers are spread on our crops (we may be the only species in the universe that poisons its own food supplies); diesel powered irrigation is often necessary to grow those crops; more and more crop production to feed an ever-growing population is draining critical aquafers and lowering ground water tables everywhere, sometimes leading to forest die-back when ground-water levels fall below the root zone.
How does a government go about raising income and wealth taxes when the people most affected are those in positions of political and economic power and able to "push back" extremely effectively.On that point, did you know that in the 1960s, the marginal income tax rate for wealthy Americans was 91%? This was, just, equitable and severely resented by the rich. Beginning with the Nixon presidency and every president since, the tax system has been regressively reformed to reduce the high-income marginal tax rate to as low as 35% (I think it's now at about 37%). In short, wealthy individuals and corporate lobbyists, spurred on by such things as the Powell Memorandum (https://law2.wlu.edu/deptimages/Powell%20Archives/PowellMemorandumTypescript.pdf), have purposefully gradually changed political language around wealth and corporate values so that the rich pay less and less (not more and more) income and wealth taxes in the US and other jurisdictions.
So, to summarize: we often know what needs to be done but very few articles, including this latest one, detail exactly how we can overcome cultural inertia to actually implement policies that would make a real difference.
Cheers,
Bill
From: sco...@googlegroups.com <sco...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Harris, Craig <har...@msu.edu>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 1:49:01 PM
To: SCORAI Group
Subject: [SCORAI] how to make degrowth work
[CAUTION: Non-UBC Email] from the journal “nature” . . .
Wealthy countries can create prosperity while using less materials and energy
if they abandon economic growth as an objective,
argues a group of researchers in ecological economics.
They outline five key research challenges that will have to be met
to re-focus economic activity around securing human needs and well-being.
“The question is no longer whether growth will run into limits,” they write,
“but rather how we can enable societies to prosper without growth,
to ensure a just and ecological future.”
cheers,
craig
John Ehrenfeld
The very mention of "tools" is an example of shift-the-burden, since it implies that there is some technological means to fix the problem. As I have written before, we are the problem and that is where the "fix" must be directed. Climate change is an unintended consequence of NORMAl western, modern cultural activities. We can't fix that, but we can change what is normal, by changing the kind of beings we are. Our cultures reflect the way humans think about the world and act accordingly.
Change must happen there. In a religious context, such change is called "metanoia, in the vernacular, a change of heart. But that is only a metaphor for a change in the way we attend to the world, that is think and act. Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, an exceedingly wise man, argued that modern humans have chosen expediency over wonder. Converting those two words into a verbal sense. he can be said to interpose "using" against "caring." Heidegger also saw such a dichotomy, authentic vs. inauthentic being, again caring opposed to using. He wrote that modern humans see the world as ":standing reserve." Erich Fromm wrote about "having" vs. "being." Again the same opposition. But there is more to it than philosophical or theological differences.
The two sides of this opposition correspond to the way the two sides of the brain attend to the world, writes Iain McGilchrist in his two tomes: The Master and his Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, and The Matter with Things. The right hemisphere connects to and takes care of the world, particularly its life; the left creates its own world and views the real world simply as means to whatever ends it seeks. Flourishing, the state where both the Planet and its inhabitants are expressing the fullness of their potential, without endangering the future possibility of continuing that state, depends on a balance between the two sides, with the right in charge, and the left supporting it.
But, the modern brain has become unbalanced in exactly the opposite way; the left dominates the right hemisphere. Wonder, the experience of simply being, has all but disappeared, in adults. Very young children still experience wonder as their primary way of being, connecting to the world, since the right brain develops earlier and faster than the left for some years. Increasing focus on STEM in secondary school is making the imbalance worse as it is displacing music, the arts, and other right-brain oriented activities. I have taken McGilchrist's work on the divided brain and rebuilt my own thinking about flourishing on it in The Right Way to Flourish: Reconnecting with the Real World.
If you need an example of how the left-brain seizes on everything out there to serve its own purposes, just look at what is happening in the world of AI. Educators have their own "climate change" concern because, students are starting to use ChatGPT or other similar programs.to write their required essays. Not only does this confound current pedagogy, but it eliminates the possibility of the wonder that accompanies creation, producing beauty from nowhere.
Tools, whether technological (wind, solar, carbon capture,) or technocratic (taxes, protests), will not hack it. The left-hemisphere never gives up trying to retain its position of master, making it very hard to see/hear anything that threatens it. The frustration in this group is palpable, but won't abate until you, at least, do give this argument a hearing.
John
'Robert Rattle' via SCORAI wrote on 1/20/23 10:02 AM:
--
- SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
- Join SCORAI: https://scorai.net/join
- Submit an item to next newsletter: daniel...@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/289847737.1595349.1674226976686%40mail.yahoo.com.
