"We produce a lot of food for everyone"

[sen-no-sen]

We look forward to seeing you! Sen-no-sen, for providing the conference link for François Roddier on thermodynamics, it's really interesting!

You're welcome!

His conclusion is however a little surprising ...

That is to say?

[Ahmed]

After having described in detail a set of determinisms which explains the evolution of the universe and of humanity, the speaker concludes by inviting men to take charge, ie to refuse these determinisms ...
It is therefore a little surprising, even if it is not illogical, insofar as these determinisms are potentially lethal.

This is in line with what I have already written (albeit of a completely different inspiration), that any system evolves by amplifying harmful effects and ends up perishing from its success.

[Janic]

ahmed hello

For her, indeed it does not matter where the gain comes from.

very just! This can be seen very clearly with the transition from ideological bio to commercial bio. As long as organic was little or not in demand, supermarkets were completely uninterested ?. Since its formalization and the growing interest of consumers for less polluted products, supermarkets have discovered a conscience (and continue to sell industrial crap)

[sen-no-sen]

After having described in detail a set of determinisms which explains the evolution of the universe and of humanity, the speaker concludes by inviting men to take charge, ie to refuse these determinisms ...
It is therefore a little surprising, even if it is not illogical, insofar as these determinisms are potentially lethal.

Absolutely!
What's great about François Roddier is that starting from a number of fundamental rules, he manages to explain all the phenomena at work in our world ...
Have you read his (extraordinary) book?

This is in line with what I have already written (albeit of a completely different inspiration), that any system evolves by amplifying harmful effects and ends up perishing from its success.

Evidence that great minds meet!
H.Bloom also arrives with his "Lucifer principle" to an explanation of the same order on the mechanisms at work in our lower world.

[dede2002]

We can worry about it, or rejoice ...

Neither one nor the other: compassionate marketing is just a commercial niche like any other ...

It can coexist in the midst of the usual "unfair" trade without fear of contaminating it, and for good reason: it obeys the same logic.

Imagine the case of a multinational food company that makes a profit by incorporating palm oil into its products; it understands the potential of consumers hostile to the consequences of this culture and therefore decides to launch a "line" of products guaranteed without palm oil: from now on, the margin provided by this cheap fat * is replaced by the selling price more high, which some consumers are willing to pay for their good conscience.

For her, indeed it does not matter where the gain comes from.

* Cheap because its externalities are free ...

Hi Ahmed,

We can see the problem the other way around, the "higher" selling price is closer to reality, while the "cheap" price of industrial palm oil does not include social problems or problems. induced ecological disasters.

Good conscience would be to avoid products whose price is doped down, being aware of buying at a "real" price, rather than thinking of paying "more" ...

[Ahmed]

I do not know if the great minds meet, but, more modestly, I observe this convergence between practitioners of different disciplines who build an explanatory grid from the elementary rules observed in the practice of their respective knowledge.
These are, without a doubt, angles of observation different from the same universe.

In terms of conclusions, there is unanimity in the observation of a catastrophic development if the logic in use continues, but that voluntary action (although improbable!), Could save us from this fatal outcome.

[dede2002]

This fatal outcome, if it is more and more obvious, we can hope that it approaches quickly enough to create a repellent effect among those we call "poor countries", them whose way of life has not " again "our destructive power.

[Janic]

ahmed hello

I observe this convergence between practitioners of different disciplines who build an explanatory grid from the elementary rules observed in the practice of their respective knowledge.

I love this formulation which sums up that "Everyone sees noon at his door"
The problem is that (because of the multiplicity of disciplines) these grids are excessive simplifications which leave aside other disciplines which would not stick to the proposed model.

[Ahmed]

Simplifications, of course, because there is no question of explaining everything, but, from elementary logical bricks, to reconstruct the main axes allowing to order the apparent chaos of reality.

It is precisely by a certain distance that this operation is possible, what is called in philosophy the "point of view of Sirius".

@ Old man : the impoverished countries are in the same galley, moreover they have been converted for a long time to our model.
There is therefore no reason for them to learn any signs which do not influence our own policies at all.

[Janic]

ahmed

Simplifications, of course, because there is no question of explaining everything, but, from elementary logical bricks, to reconstruct the main axes allowing to order the apparent chaos of reality.

It is not necessarily a question of wanting to explain everything (fortunately otherwise "we would not have left the hostel"). What I wanted to underline is that, as with legos, everyone can build what they want to see happen. Others, with the same elementary bricks will build something else or, to use an example that I ' I have already mentioned, with the same basic elements, we can build an airplane as well as a submarine. However, this ordering will depend on the project that we want to achieve (this ordering of chaos towards a certain reality), i.e. an airplane , either a submarine or anything else for that matter as the debate on evolution or creation shows.