This Man that favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...

philosophical debates and companies.
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: This man who favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...




by sen-no-sen » 20/10/16, 21:50

Christophe wrote:
Mmmm we must not have the same sense of "mastery" ... when we master a technology, it means that controls perfectly: this is not the case for hydrocarbons given the disasters (of all kinds ... including wars) that their past AND future exploitation causes ...

Continue in your analogy please because I still did not understand the relationship with the 2 examples and this subject ... (I am a little kite ...)


Perfection is not of this world, any use necessarily leads to accidents.
I have mastered bikes from a very young age but that did not prevent me from taking a few beautiful bowls, it is almost consubstantial by the way! It is valid for walking, or even eating (who has never swallowed crookedly?)
Given the gigantic quantities of hydrocarbons used for more than a century and the number of accidents (low in terms of use), I think we can speak of mastery.

Evolution takes place through the process of failure / success / memorization.
This is the case for technologies, of course.
As mentioned above, I do not see how 19th century society could have mastered thermonuclear fusion or high-efficiency photovoltaics without taking other previous steps?
It was in itself quite logical that we extract coal, then oil and finally gas to make the industry work (and therefore by extension generate pollution ...).
There are therefore many thresholds to be crossed, and I hardly see how it would have been possible to envisage "shortcuts", given the knowledge of the time (and social determinisms).
Worse if future travelers had disclosed some secrets to their ancestors, this would have been the best way to destroy humanity!
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974

Re: This man who favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...




by Christophe » 20/10/16, 22:02

It's true you're right ... I tend to be too idealistic ... one of my big flaws! : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:
0 x
dede2002
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1111
Registration: 10/10/13, 16:30
Location: Geneva countryside
x 189

Re: This man who favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...




by dede2002 » 20/10/16, 22:50

Ahmed wrote:Christophe, you write:
It is the basis of econology which wants to graft ecology to the economy is to summarize very quickly: man <-> economy <-> nature ...
That is to say going through money (since man obviously understands "only" that) to better respect the environment and nature!

Suffice to say that "it's dead", because wanting to transform the immediate cause of the degradation of nature into its opposite ... : roll:


If the economy were accounted for differently, ie without the negative externalities being paid for by others, and by the communities, it would be less economical :P .
The 1 euro "first price" package of pasta would cost more than the best organic handmade spaghetti, for example ...
Or a "free" phone for which peasants have been expelled to look for rare earths and other metals, it's common!

But with ifs, if not like you say "it's dead" : Wink:
0 x
eclectron
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2922
Registration: 21/06/16, 15:22
x 397

Re: Analysis of anthropogenic global warming




by eclectron » 20/10/16, 23:33

Christophe wrote:.. all this does not seem to me incompatible with my hypothesis ...

Yes we say the same thing overall but justified otherwise, it was just to give my way of seeing : Wink:

Christophe wrote:It is the basis of econology which wants to graft ecology to the economy is to summarize very quickly: man <-> economy <-> nature ...

That is to say going through money (since man obviously understands "only" that) to better respect the environment and nature!

It is a pragmatic way of influencing human behavior, effectively by money.
I aspire to better, a change of behavior through consciousness but it may be a little too ambitious for the time.
I will come back ! : Lol:
0 x
whatever.
We will try the 3 posts per day max
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974

Re: Analysis of anthropogenic global warming




by Christophe » 21/10/16, 00:03

eclectron wrote:It is a pragmatic way of influencing human behavior, effectively by money.
I aspire to better, a change of behavior through consciousness but it may be a little too ambitious for the time.
I will come back ! : Lol:


Houlalal, you're even more idealistic than me!

Already Ahmed does not believe in the "money" method, so the awareness method ...

M'enfin the latter can work ... in the event of a big disaster that would shake humanity well? The problem is that the man is in "Little frog" mode: https://www.econologie.com/petite-grenou ... ronnement/
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: This man who favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...




by Janic » 21/10/16, 08:59

sen no sen hello
Except that fate does not meet the criteria of refutability.
what criteria exactly?
If it is determined [i] a posteriori and it is therefore impossible to demonstrate the reverse, self a priori and then it foreshadows a self-fulfilling prophet ...
This is indeed what poses a problem for humanity on a philosophical level because if it is predetermined, nobody will be able to change anything about it and therefore, once again the concept of free will which we have already discussed questioned. If it is destiny, we fall back on the same purpose as the example of the sea given on WIKI. To take another, more visible example, it is like the water that descends from the mountains to reach the sea because it is predetermined for this route (even with windings that could be qualified as free will). So determinism or destiny, it's just a question of terminology which covers the same purpose.
It is more correct to speak of determinisms, because once these are understood it is then possible to act *, but as you rightly note, this is very difficult.

Another illusion of the mind that to believe that you can act as being able to thus change the course of things, (the illusion of free will) when determinism itself opposes it (or so it is no longer determinism )
* This is the case in the field of accidentology, more vehicles in circulation = more accidents, but understanding the latter makes it possible to reduce their frequencies.

Unless, once again, the two are intimately linked and the more accidents there are, the more equilibrium means are developed (yin-yang side). Thus the more prey there are, the more predators there are and its reverse, but no system of understanding of the beings concerned can be invoked. (It is due to the ego side of the human who takes himself for an exception of nature)
self a priori and then it foreshadows a self-fulfilling prophet
if we stick to the role of prophecies, it is not to give the means to change the course of things, but to show that the future is already written and is being realized and is therefore good predetermined. but it is more in the philosophical-spiritual domain that the question is to be found.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: This man who favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...




by sen-no-sen » 21/10/16, 12:31

Janic wrote:What criteria exactly?


Criteria for RE-FU-TA-LI-BI-TES it is marked as the salute port! : Mrgreen:

So determinism or destiny, it's just a question of terminology which covers the same purpose.


Not really, fate is like fatalism, it is a peremptory assertion impossible to verify.
Ex:A plane crashed it was fate... how to assert that the plane crash was linked to fate? : Arrow: unverifiable.
It would be necessary to have a series of parallel realities to verify that indeed such a flight had to crash in all cases.

The notion of determinisms is different since it is verifiable, such cause gives such effect, and if one modifies some elements one can avoid a catastrophe.
This is the role of accidentology.

Another illusion of the mind that to believe that you can act as being able to thus change the course of things, (the illusion of free will) when determinism itself opposes it (or so it is no longer determinism )


However:
Image
Evolution of road mortality in France from 1970 to 2014
How do you explain that in the 70s there were 16000 deaths / year on the roads of France when now we are under the bar of 4000 ???
Despite a very significant increase in the number of vehicles ...
Image

there is no fatality.
It is all a question of information, of awareness.
If we introduce negentropy into a system we can thwart a large number of events, this remains determinism, but above all not fate or fatalism (= irrational belief).

if we stick to the role of prophecies, it is not to give the means to change the course of things, but to show that the future is already written and is being realized and is therefore good predetermined. but it is more in the philosophical-spiritual domain that the question is to be found.


Or more rationally: if we believe in a thing then there is a good chance that actors (bearer of the said belief) set up this one by themselves and that it will eventually come true ... .
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
eclectron
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2922
Registration: 21/06/16, 15:22
x 397

Re: Analysis of anthropogenic global warming




by eclectron » 21/10/16, 16:25

Christophe wrote:
eclectron wrote:It is a pragmatic way of influencing human behavior, effectively by money.
I aspire to better, a change of behavior through consciousness but it may be a little too ambitious for the time.
I will come back ! : Lol:


Houlalal, you're even more idealistic than me!

Already Ahmed does not believe in the "money" method, so the awareness method ...

M'enfin the latter can work ... in the event of a big disaster that would shake humanity well? The problem is that the man is in "Little frog" mode: https://www.econologie.com/petite-grenou ... ronnement/


: Lol: Idealist? I do not think so.
I perceive elevation of consciousness as the only intelligent way out of the problem.
Are we smart enough, I already doubt myself at this level…
Maybe you just have to be patient and forgiving of yourself.

Everything is good to take. The money method doesn't make you smarter or more aware, but it can be quick and efficient.
This supposes an "enlightened" structuring around money to move in the right direction, like sheep.

My feeling is that currently the economy ship has no captain.
The captain being the profit and one falls back on the ego-egoist, the self-centered man on his personal interests.

If this is what Ahmed sees, I am more, because it would surprise me that it moves alone in the right direction, thanks to the invisible hand of the market. : Lol: : Lol: : Lol:

The elevation of consciousness is a bit what happens in spite of us in this period of history, through the meeting of exponentiality and finitude.
Exponential demographic growth with all the consumed resources that follow and opposite the finitude of the planet.
There, we feel that there may be a problem.
Maybe that's what makes us take conscience and as benoît RITTAUD would say, which crystallizes our fears, (sometimes on false problems such as the climate. : roll: but let's move on ...)
The feeling that there is a problem is just as mathematics shows, the exponential cannot be contained in a limit.
By cons it remains to prove scientifically that we have a real problem, with quantitatively quantified studies, that we are going towards problems related to demography and resources etc.

there the economy, the invisible hand of the market, can play a regulatory role but there will be human and environmental loss.
There is no question of eating less once the critical threshold is reached, the market solution will be that some people will simply not eat, until they fall below the sustainable threshold.
Are we going towards this type of problem, I frankly wonder ????
0 x
whatever.
We will try the 3 posts per day max
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: This man who favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...




by Janic » 21/10/16, 18:04

There is no question of eating less once the critical threshold is reached, the market solution will be that some people will simply not eat, until they fall below the sustainable threshold.
Are we going towards this type of problem, I frankly wonder ????
We are not going there, we are already there and this is going to get worse with population growth and the fact that the planet is not extensible. However, the problem is precisely that it will not be possible for us to feed US as we currently do because, apart from the mismanagement that this represents, the choices made to favor agricultural production for the purpose of animal food represents nonsense in itself since the 'we know that it will not be possible to feed on this model this growing animal population for this growing human population also which aspires to this model of consumption. However, here again, it is illusory to believe that the undernourished populations will continue to accept this situation indefinitely (we should learn from history that repeats itself)
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: This man who favors the economy to life, biodiversity and nature ...




by Ahmed » 21/10/16, 19:31

Eclectron, you write:
My feeling is that currently the economy ship has no captain.
The captain being the profit and one falls back on the ego-egoist, the self-centered man on his personal interests.

The analysis is rather well seen, although it lacks (in my eyes!) Of precision: the economy is indeed its own captain (and this, from the start!) And men its agents of function, it is inappropriate to speak of selfishness, since the individualism which is observed in our societies is a consequence of the economy and not a cause; Selfishness must prevail if we want to dissipate a maximum of energy, or if we prefer, in order to accumulate more abstract value. We are therefore dealing with determinism and not with moral alteration.
The economy has two functions, the first and its only real purpose is to accumulate more and more abstract value, the second being only a means of achieving this goal consists in satisfying needs (in the broad sense, since the great majority of "needs" are social). We can see that the part attributed to the means depends only on its effectiveness * with regard to the primary purpose, that is to say that it is very variable, between the tangible and the symbolic. This unequal duality (between finality and means) arises from a great ambiguity, which hides it from the eyes of many.
Et Janic is right to point out, even if I would not do it in its terms, that the consequences are present, that they imply, less because of the physical limitations, but of the growing difficulty of satisfying this expansion of the abstract value of sacrificing a growing part of humanity. This is not new, but what it is is that the "selection" ** now takes place within the dominant countries (instead of only concerning the peripheral countries).

* This means that, just as water takes the easiest way to reach the sea, the satisfaction of needs will be measured by the minimum capable of fulfilling the conditions of value accumulation: market exchange .
** It was the term used in Nazi extermination camps to sort out those who were going to be physically eliminated.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Society and Philosophy"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 248 guests