« The Two-Coin Solution | Main | HSBC Is Our Name, Money Laundering Is Our Game »

12/12/2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ken Barrows

Who are the blameless? The San (sp?) of the Kalahari? I think it's too exhausting to think of seven billion people or even 315 million (US population). We should think small when changing our behavior. OK, who's first?

clyde

We are, like all the great apes, social political animals.
We are this way due to our very DNA. This way of being has evolved to allow us to become the dominant species we now are.
We, therefore, cannot transcend politics because we are political by our very nature.
It will also be our downfall. There is nothing we can do about this.

Ean Gray

"At this point, you might be asking—but what can I do??? What can be done???

I don't know. You tell me."

You know Dave, I think the very answer to that question is something that goes against the longest held beliefs every nearly every culture int he history of the humans race: That when faced with a seemingly insurmountable challenge, humans are capable of producing an effective technical response. Well, the answer to your questions is that there is no effective technical response. There is nothing we can do, period. And I think that is something that is just too hard for us to accept.

Greedy Human Who Knows Cheap Fossil Fuels Won't Last!

"but what can I do??? What can be done???"

Live life to the fullest, burn as much fossil fuels in that enjoyment as possible. Since it's all going to be gone anyway, I want to enjoy it as much as possible right here and now. When the shit hits the fan, plane rides and all-inclusive cruises will be a thing of the past. (selfish, yes, but I think anyone who grasps what you're saying on this blog already realizes that the whole of humanity is selfish to the point of extinction. I want mine before there's nothing left to have!!!)

When nothing can be done, all that is left is to enjoy what is left in the time remaining.

Diogenes

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rage at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Dylan Thomas

FJM

The root of the division is me. The moment you say me, there`s you, the other. That`s dangerous, so you find securety in the group,we; but the other, (they) does exactly the same! Then there`s the danger the group throws you out and around the corner we see conformity (becoming a whistleblower is a very dangerous thing for example, something both groups know, so the other, they don`t like you either!)
You get the picture.
So the source of the problem is the me.
In that light you have to ask that question
And it`s the most profound question: can the "ego/me" ends the division which is rooted in the "ego/me", can the ego ends the ego.
Please, don`t make a mistake, this is not religion, not at all!
This is a simple question about the way humans function.
Now the answer :)

Alexander Ač

What can be done???

To summarize knowledge for future generations (with significantly reduced numbers compared to today) so that they can learn from history

/sarcasm

Alex

Aboc Zed

Dave notes correctly that default human condition made of politics that is always one group interests against another with the whole continuing on automatic pilot to the eventual rebalancing.

FJM added a somewhat philosophical dimension to the same by pointing to the individual's inability to transcend ego and 'specialness' in favour of feeling and acting as integral part of organism-whole. In other words, homo sapiens is not eusocial and this means he will go extinct and give way to another variety of homo, the next stage in evolutionarey process. Of course this is a forward looking statement and as such is open to uncertainties that Thomas Homer Dixon calling "not knowing the unknowns".

Alexander mentioned carrying knowledge forward which is essential for the posterity to gain from the "mistakes" of homo sapiens sapiens.

I want to add the dimension of language. The fact that people when they enter into discussion rarely if ever take the time to make sure that they understand the axiomatic set of each other. In other words we think we understand but we don't and therefore anything we say turns out to be noise. This I call the issue of forensic integrity of the discussion. If it is not established at the outset the conversation is pointless and a waste of time.

I think if we all learn how to communicate in such a way as being able to establish forensic integrity of the discussion we will be able to creat the necessary environment in which further evolution of genus homo can take place.

That I would consider a valuble contribution.

FJM

Dave says: "I don't know", when he asks the question "what can I do??? What can be done???. He looked at all the options and he sees the trick of the scientific mind, that there`s always a solution. And you come along and says for example: "you have to learn how to communicate etc.", the solution! You take him for another ride ! The scientific ride/approach again.
The point, where you say: "i really don`t know" is the point where real discoveries are made. That`s the point where Einstein did his fabulous realisation of relativity. Don`t get me wrong, this is only the principle. We don`t need more, better knowledge! Again, don`t get me wrong, i`m not against knowledge, not at all.

Aboc Zed

I do not offer "solutions" because they do not exist at the scale of Human Condition.

I merely point out to the fact that like the fish in the water we are so are immersed in Human Condition that we don't see how it affects the way we think and who we are. Dave frequently talks about this point as well.

"I don't know" is in the lexicon of any person who remotely understands what science is and how scientific method operates. In fact the so called "knowledge" is defined as refinement of so-called "uknown".

The key is to be able to recognize opinion when it is peddled as fact and understand that when we believe something to be knowledge may turn out to be ignorant opinion when we do our homework.

But most of the people, if not all, are lazy bums. They don't like to do their homework. Even when they know that their life depends on it.

And when the issue is about quality of life for posterity we could not care less - such are the ways of homo sapiens sapiens.

So the question to you, FJM,

what do we actuall _need_? :)

FJM

I don`t give a sh*t what the lexicon says about his fenomenon :)
I`m talking about the factual situation, the state of mind so to say, when you have a burning question (like Dave has!)and you have searched for an answer,for 5 years, 25 years, your whole life, and you have studies all the answers given by others, 1 time, 10 times and you KNOW these are not the answers. I`m talking that: "I REALLY DON`T KNOW", that state of mind, the state of mind something new can happen, the state of mind Einstein was in for example.
If you are interested in that aspect too, you can "see" that knowledge by it`s very nature is limited. You can proof it too. Not easy, but the most brilliant logician and mathematician Kurt Gödel did it.
I don`t know, only a few have been there,, it`s not an easy thing, i can tell you, it s a "lonely place", the "place where miracles are made"
Dave knows what i`m talking about and if not, his cry isn`t worth a dime.

Aboc Zed

FJM, I don't know if your interpretation of Dave's state of mind is adequate. Only can comment on this if he cares.

I am familiar with Godel incompleteness theorems.

I agree that those are important to understand the nature of knowledge.

If you are so into Godel's work you should have no difficulties in understanding the material at www.condition.org which is an application of Godel's theorems to Human Condition.


And if you don't get it your words aren't worth a penny. :)

Surfzombo13

Well, I used to take the "There isn't shit that can be done, so live it up." tack as a previous commenter stated, but I'm beginning to think that maybe, just maybe, if a group of above ground and underground resisters began taking action that something might be done. This problem is not a human problem, but a life on Earth problem. As Dave said, it is ALL humans that are the problem. We are daily taking up to 200 species of plant and animal species to extinction, and I am not cool with that. I can not sit idly by as my species overgrazes the field, making the field unlivable for all other forms of life. The only way this can be stopped is by the dismantling of industrial civilization. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view), a lot of people will have to suffer and die for that to happen. But, they're probably going to do that anyways, seeing the path we've laid out for ourselves. The choice is clear, if we humans are going to go extinct (or close to that edge), do we want to take the rest of the Earth's life with us?? Or do it in a way that life besides human will carry on and begin to thrive again? Hell, the Earth got along just fine before we came on the scene, it does not need us, but it is important that we do not let our narcissistic egos take it with us when we go. Question: Has anybody here heard of or read "Deep Green Resistance"???

Dr.F.J.Mastenbroek

Aboc, may i ask you one question. What does it mean when You say "i really don't know"?

Aboc Zed

FJM,

Here is your answer:

"I really don't know."

Aboc Zed

FJM,

I know that I will not deliver anything new to you when I give you below somethin that can be used to answer ANY and ALL questions. I know you will understand what I mean by that.

The statement is:

"The answer to this question is the following: "This question has no answer".

Cheers,
ZA

FJM

ZA,
i don`t know if Dave likes this kind of conversations on his blog.
So this is my last one.
If you read back my previous reactions you can see that i`m not interested in an intellectuel answer al all but in a factuel one. What`s going on or not going on "inside" of you?

BTW, that`s not my answer :)

Aboc Zed

FJM,
I think this exchange is going nowhere and there is no point to continue it. This one is my last one as well.

That was "factuel" answer for you while being "mine".

BTW, what's "inside" and what's "you"? :)

The comments to this entry are closed.