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

[eclectron]

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 eliminated.

I talked about the notion of ego-selfishness which may seem vague indeed.
There is indeed in each of us a psychological center which claims to be self = ego
This center, even animals have it to a different degree from us.
An animal defends "ITS" possessions: its own life, its territory, its female (s), its offspring, its food, etc.
It is this selfish, self-centered basis that directs all action of the individual, by selection of the possible choices in order to last.
It is not a value judgment on my part it is the description of a fact.
Man has refined this selfishness and indeed individualist society allows him to better express this natural tendency, unlike tribal life where sharing was the norm.
but the selfish background was already there, just under the rug.
Regarding man, we can introduce a value judgment because man has power over his natural selfishness.
this is what we call civilization.
In short, selfishness is the basis of all of society, including the economy, and not vice versa.
Society being only the sum of selfishness (individualities)
We have the society that we are.
There is nothing to complain about except changing yourself to change society.
an element changes and everything changes. It is tiny, of course, but I do not see any other solution.

[eclectron]

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)

I agree with this intuitive perception that we have a lot to have and which leads to fear.
The question is, are there tangible, quantified elements that corroborate this feeling, or are we frightening ourselves for the "pleasure", given that the period is favorable for that? (warming, peak oil, overpopulation, pollution, environmental destruction)

Really, with figures, studies, this perception which leads to a fear (or the opposite), is it founded on the facts?
Like, is there an "IPCC" of "life on earth as a whole"? and skeptics of course.

[Ahmed]

Society being only the sum of selfishness.

This deduction is only the excessive generalization of the observation of a current state, itself determined by the factors that I have mentioned. It is also paradoxical (at first sight) that selfishness flourishes in a type of society where dependence on others has never been greater ...
There is a certain anachronism here, since individualism only appears because of the "Enlightenment" movement in the XNUMXth century. I speak of course of conceptual individualism, social and not of the previous manifestations, on the scale of the intimate self. Society, whatever it is, cannot be reduced to the sum of individualisms: it would even be its negation! The whole is necessarily greater than the sum of its parts.
The economy presupposes the destruction of the solidarities or communities of the old regime and it is this movement of the Enlightenment which will take care of the metamorphosis: it was necessary to break the old links to weave new ones, entirely subject to economic despotism and that is will operate in the name of freedom ... the freedom to be delivered to the market . This is how it is possible, for example, to explain the real reasons for the abolition of slavery, rather than by the feelings of compassion that usually serve as their screen.

[Ahmed]

You also write:

Really, with figures, studies, this perception which leads to a fear (or the opposite), is it founded on the facts?

Figures or facts make you say what you want, what matters is to perceive the logic at work and it is not that difficult. Many are aware of this, but countless freelancers are working to muddle the waters so that nothing comes to impede the fatal march of an absurd logic and a miserable objective: to sacrifice what constitutes the conditions of life on earth, in order to 'increase the accumulation of abstract value.

[eclectron]

Society being only the sum of selfishness.

This deduction is only the excessive generalization of the observation of a current state, itself determined by the factors that I have mentioned.

No, what is first is the individual, his ego and therefore his egoism resulting from the animal instinct, which takes a gigantic proportion in man thanks to his consciousness of himself and his "intelligence", let us say rather his intellectual skill.

I'm not sure I make myself clear in fact?
Finally chicken or egg, you choose what you want, I would not make cheese.

[eclectron]

You also write:

Really, with figures, studies, this perception which leads to a fear (or the opposite), is it founded on the facts?

Figures or facts make you say what you want, what matters is to perceive the logic at work and it is not that difficult. Many are aware of this, but countless freelancers are working to muddle the waters so that nothing comes to impede the fatal march of an absurd logic and a miserable objective: to sacrifice what constitutes the conditions of life on earth, in order to 'increase the accumulation of abstract value.

Yes logic everyone perceives it here, well I think, and even a lot outside.
only logic is not enough to be right irrevocably.
Even today's trends can change for reasons still unknown today, I think of the overcrowding in which I told you about a video. if I find it I will put it back, not on my PC, there

the quantified data are important and precise studies on the systems which macroscopically govern the Earth with us on it too, to consolidate or invalidate our perception.
our perception can be irrational, it is good to be sure of it precisely: Large-scale task!
I recognize that everything is muddled and that it is difficult to hear the signal.
If someone knows studies on the Earth system as a whole, I am interested, unless you have to do it yourself with multiple sources?

[sen-no-sen]

It is also paradoxical (at first sight) that selfishness flourishes in a type of society where dependence on others has never been greater ...
There is a certain anachronism here, since individualism only appears because of the "Enlightenment" movement in the XNUMXth century.

Indeed, the paradox is only apparent.
The power of the flows of energies which cross a society are the consequence of a technological control (by retro-action), that this requires a degree of abstraction which will necessarily favor the proletarianization of the individuals.
In such a system the tendency to egoism is thus very strong (the stability of the system makes it possible to "do without" others) but the dependence (on others with respect to production) is maximum ...

eclectron you write:

No, what is first is the individual, his ego and therefore his egoism resulting from the animal instinct, which takes a gigantic proportion in man thanks to his consciousness of himself and his "intelligence", let us say rather his intellectual skill.

I do not think that animals are strictly speaking endowed with an ego.
The ego results from the neuro-psychic process specific to our species and partly explains our hyper-violence.
Hyper-violence itself resulting from the dichotomy between our three brains.

However, the planetary ecocide is not only linked to a simple matter of selfishness, but rather to a process of "technologization"inevitable that it would be necessary to take into account.

[eclectron]

eclectron you write:

No, what is first is the individual, his ego and therefore his egoism resulting from the animal instinct, which takes a gigantic proportion in man thanks to his consciousness of himself and his "intelligence", let us say rather his intellectual skill.

I do not think that animals are strictly speaking endowed with an ego.

the definition of the ego can be broad, one should not stop at the restrictive definition of a motel or a motel.
for me it's theidea to be someone which has nothing to do with the does to be someone, even if there is a connection.

this is not what I said: "No, what is first is the individual (man), his ego ... from animal instinct "
the ego is an evolution, a perfecting, of the animal instinct.
the animal defends things for consist of profit as I said above.
Man does nothing else in principle.
I do not doubt that it is neuro psychic for the man as for the animal.

However, the planetary ecocide is not only linked to a simple matter of selfishness, but rather to a process of "technologization"inevitable that it would be necessary to take into account.

technologization resulting from human thought, which amplifies the primary instincts camouflaged by the polishing of civilization.
Cornered, any man (or almost) wakes up his hyper-violent part.
At the origin of technologization, there is indeed the petty egoism of each as a motor, coupled with the power of thought capable of solving problems and which in the end brings satisfaction to the small human ego .-> egoism as an individual motor .
this leads to an ecocide thanks to boundless and unconscious thinking, and boundless energy.
the energy may go out ...
limitless thought is the weak point that man has to work for in order to grow -> widening of consciousness.
also become aware of the vulnerability of its habitat, the environment, in the face of its own current power:
what a magnificent century, a century of all transformations, you just must not miss the boat!

[Janic]

I do not think that animals are strictly speaking endowed with an ego.

the human being has the mania to take himself as a reference in all things. For centuries the animal has been assumed not to be this, not to have that, like we "the higher race". These clichés fall as we observe other forms of life, which should teach us the humility and not the vanity that feeds this ego in great waves.

[Ahmed]

The individual cannot be at the origin of society, since society preexists the individual: he cannot conceive of an individual outside of society ... (I am not talking about biology or evolution. ..)
Sen-no-sen beautifully formulated the contradiction between the possibility of individualism and our growing interdependence ...