Man, this suicidal animal

philosophical debates and companies.
jean.caissepas
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 660
Registration: 01/12/09, 00:20
Location: R.alpes
x 423

Man, this suicidal animal




by jean.caissepas » 30/09/12, 00:49

Hello,

Le Monde newspaper cites a new work by Jared Diamond

To read to those who do not believe that man can kill himself by massacring his environment as now.

http://www.lemonde.fr/culture/article/2 ... L-32280308

Good reading....
0 x
Past habits must change,
because the future must not die.
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 01/10/12, 20:29

Very interesting, thank you!

Nevertheless, it is quite easy to make an observation of the degradations, it is also very fashionable (see the films "Home" or "Titanic Syndrome").
The problem arises when it comes to talking about solutions.
Very often we are shown wind turbines, solar panels, very pretty all that, but it is a very reducing vision of societal and environmental problems.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 01/10/12, 21:50

Very just!
We must not fall into the trap (sic), "green" energy, it is first of all a duplication which is added to the usual methods, in order to make the economic machine run a little more.

Contrary to what is claimed in Le Monde, others (very few, it is true) that D.Jared wrote that the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic did not constitute the progress celebrated by Orthodoxy; so Mr. Salhins , in his book: "Stone Age, Age of Abundance".
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 02/10/12, 08:04

in the 60s two authors described this future economic-ecological-social state. We are in the middle of it and their works have not aged a bit: "Dancing with the Devil" by Gunther Schwab and "The Last Judgment" by Gordon Rattray Taylor. And the devil seems to have a good head start!
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 02/10/12, 09:35

The original title of the cited work of Gordon Rattray Taylor was: "The Doomsday Book: Can the World Survive?", which is more explicit (...: can the world survive?).
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 02/10/12, 12:44

this title in French comes from the quotation from the apocalypse of John chap. 7,8 and 9 put in the introduction to his book, it's much more catchy!
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 02/10/12, 22:12

He was accused of D.Jared many things, including an overly causal view of geography (and related resources).
I find that it does seem to underestimate the cultural factor. This is obvious if we take the example of ancient China: technical knowledge was relatively developed (compared to other regions of the world at the same time) and yet it did not evolve at all according to our model ( okay, it caught up then, but by imitation and after significant cultural changes).
Thus, the exploitation of coal which could have been more intensive, was done only superficially because of a taboo.
Another example, the powder was only used for recreational purposes while military use is quite obvious but contrary to the code of honor ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 03/10/12, 03:04

Since we are talking about the apocalypse and the bible ... It is not only this one anyway ...

The man could possibly get out of it, if he was able to take care of himself really alone (and not because he would be forced to do so ... as is generally the case today.)

Why this question? Because if humanity is going to decline, I fear very much that there is not work for all, and in this case, it would be better that it manages to occupy itself positively, rather than to destroy itself . Otherwise it could make a carnage amah ...

If however he would not succeed, then no, he would not be able to ensure the sustainability of the immense riches still present on the planet, or de facto that of our species ...

Outside there is a good chance that it will succeed. He could do this by reviewing the curriculum in schools. It would be a first step after a period of awareness!

Without being pessimistic, all in all, it would take several small miracles anyway.

The question is: what would it take - except to be guided by a dogma - so that he comes to make the "general states of the planetAnd take the appropriate action. Can they get down to work in this direction? While it is currently not even able to solve all basic problems globally! And there, I have no idea at this time!
0 x
the middle
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4075
Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
x 4




by the middle » 03/10/12, 09:07

Hello,
This title of discussion appeals to me.
And I don't agree too much:
Again this morning, I was reading a piece of news about lobbies and the European Union (European Union representatives receive a lot of emails from industrialists, with their consequences)
For me, it is not the little people who rule the world, but rather those who have the money, and therefore the power.
They are the ones responsible for our planetary ecological "suicide".
0 x
Man is by nature a political animal (Aristotle)
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 03/10/12, 09:17

Idem: Le_Juste_Milieu, also in your opinion ... It also made me think a lot : Lol:

... so I'm continuing on the - what should be done, so that the power changes sides - with, in particular the example of China given by Ahmed and in the perspective of what you have just said (it goes without saying that this should be on the basis of an entirely different model based on a compatible philosophy, well followed and sustainable with regard to the required change), thus - as it has always been the case - only populations with a "strong culture" (by that I mean well anchored in everyday life) would have a chance of achieving the necessary balance, which would allow a reform of the current company of "we go straight into the wall, straight ahead ... but let us do it: everything is under control» : Mrgreen:

Because against all expectations in the Western world, the Chinese have succeeded, at the cost of several successive revolutions and by dint of self-denial, when we said communism doomed to gemonies ... The fact is that they knew adapt, when they were said to be archaic, etc ... So it's not just pessimism!

Each changing society is forced to pass several milestones. And if indeed our societies leave the current theoretical model (imposed by a culture originally military, as for many), we have already "achieved" almost everything (the good as the worst) ... thus the suitable conditions to achieve a favorable transition, we already know them, it would suffice to apply them ... apply what remains of "good" of our past achievements having survived until today. I give some of them, with in the center 1) the analysis of the causes 2) the study of the means to reach the econological objectives:
- education, in general and essential;
- and necessarily the study of the background, ie civilizations and history, to avoid negationism; (Lol)
- real justice through the legislative, let alone democracy, and necessarily a program to be developed in the professional world;
- the possibility of giving everyone the possibility of accessing a “real job” - but on other bases than currently;
- created a social organization and institutions independent of economic constraints (this is already the case to a large extent, but it is hidden by hypocrisy).
- develop the concept of budget, but not according to the current short-term paradigm (otherwise we are heading towards a utopian society in the two trends of the term: and in terms of gaspi ad vitam eternam ... or in terms of disconnection from accounting reality ... unless you reinvent all finance, you have to see the economy "differently", but without rejecting the notion of optimization of "means" ...!)
- that notwithstanding the famous "job", everyone is allowed to exercise an activity useful to society (I recall the great paradox, that in which people who do not currently have a job, are excluded from society, are pushed to delinquency, end up in prison, in which they can finally access a ... job! It is a shame no?);
- as is enshrined in the Constitution of each state, access to work in a dignified manner, is I think a rule that should be fundamental!
- access to health care for all, through a “culture of prevention”, with the overhaul of laws in this direction (and a fortiriori the overhaul of the Codex Alimentarius towards this objective);
- a redefinition of the strategic challenges of the industry, should then follow de facto, to meet different needs, it would not therefore be the end of "economic activity", far from it;
- access to culture, philosophy, development and consideration of customs, with in parallel a secular approach to religious movements [yes, if ... you read that correctly, a lay legal and impartial framework offered to all movements, so that beliefs can be exercised freely, without persecution but obviously in which no coercion exerted on the respective members would be tolerated, nor sectarian excesses ... or movements motivated by profit. .. In this context, it would be necessary to review and adapt certain practices within the current dominant movements ... With beautiful theological debates in perspective : Cheesy: ] by the way, living culture based on the study of civilizations and their convergences, while the current dogmas push to divergences! But it's personal.
- access to science, would also be reviewed. An ideal framework would be established for basic research, since it would no longer be valued almost exclusively on the alder of the dogma of its applications with an exclusive aim of "profitability" (although this point cannot disappear entirely);
... And so on.

In short, and in a way, if we would have to glue the pieces of "the current crumbling» : Mrgreen: which would possibly be possible, since based on other values ​​...

Thus, humans would no longer have to work directly for money, since their work, they could no longer "lose" it. Certainly he could leave a good one, for a less good one (or a good one for another more rewarding ...) ... But he would always be active "socially" for the others. So, ultimately, people's motivation could be on other bases! For example, the lower the salary, the more the person would be estimated, but the more they would also have access to what is necessary by a barter other than simply pecuniary (by a non-capitalizable and non-transferable unit of value to find ... Something with which students could pay for their studies, pregnant women to support themselves, or the disabled find ways to get their prostheses, etc. It could be based on the "gift" dear to Bernardd. would be a quantifiable “gift” on a scale yet to be imagined ... ^^).

The human would indeed be led to "give value" to something other than what the current theoretical model offers ... The "nerve of war", could be "competence" (a kind of mix between knowledge and experience). The "need for recognition" defined as such by Maslow, could give way to the "social need to belong" which could take the place at the top of its pyramid of needs, since its place in society would no longer be conditioned by a "need (perpetual) development ”, since the individualist position would be relegated to the second rank, in order to give way to a more enviable position in the“ social group ”with necessarily a higher motivation than that offered by money. The perspective and its purpose in the world would therefore be completely different!

Political activity could then radically change course - and it would naturally - corruption would eventually disappear on its own: because quite simply the lure of "gain" would have changed sides and become purely secondary ...

Here, I wanted to give a happier note to a thread directing us towards a very dark future ... A note of hope ...! A note to tell us that: yes, all futures are possible, just choose (as Sen_No_Sen reminded so well elsewhere ...)

We will have to assume our maturity (to shorten it)
0 x

Back to "Society and Philosophy"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Macro, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 279 guests