5 ms·

CO2 levels is just one of a myriad of indicators that are off the scale now. By lifestyle I mean supermarkets and restaurants and iPhones and planes ... all th

by spangry 10y ago

CO2 levels is just one of a myriad of indicators that are off the scale now. By lifestyle I mean supermarkets and restaurants and iPhones and planes ... all the stuff that we're so proud of as a society. Scale relative to what, or when? I mean, yeah, we are certainly 'off the scale' for supermarkets, iPhones and planes compared to, say, the ancient Romans. But in fairness, they've got us well and truly beat on the ignorance, slavery and infant mortality scales. How do we rank in 'spiritual' terms relative to the Romans? But taking your assertion as a given, what specifically do you suggest we do about this problem? My concern is that, in the near future, we may find ourselves climbing down a few rungs of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, leaving 'self-actualisation' / spirituality way out of reach.

tonyedgecombe 10y ago
Yet the reality is self-actualisation / spirituality are as out of reach for many now as they were years ago when we were 'poorer'.
- virmundi 10y ago
  Self-actualization and spirituality seldom go hand in hand with wealth. Poor people have improved spirituality than wealthier people. Wealth draws your focus away from those things onto pleasures like sleeping around, or owning the latest i-device because it's the latest. Hence Jesus saying it's easier to thread a fishing line through a needle than for a wealthy person to find the Kingdom of Heaven.
  - openasocket 10y ago
    > Hence Jesus saying it's easier to thread a fishing line through a needle Nit: it's thread a camel through the eye of the needle, not fishing line
    - virmundi 10y ago
      Nope. That's just a shitty English translation. The Jews at the time were familiar with different types of ropes/threads. It is most likely that Jesus referred to the type of rope used in fishing which is much larger than a thread. http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm
      - openasocket 10y ago
        According to that link that is just one of several possible interpretations. In fact the author seems to prefer the "camel" translation, as there are contemporary examples of similar hyperbole.
        gus_massa 10y ago
        I agree. If "nor an elephant going through the eye of a needle" was a expression used previously, it's not so strange that they have a local version with a camel.
  - spangry 10y ago
    If this is indeed the case, does that mean you feel pity for those born into well-off families, and feel happy for those born into abject poverty? The latter, of course, being more likely to live a spiritually fulfilled life?
  - blacksmith_tb 10y ago
    Possibly, though it's often more complex than that. For example, the Gautama Buddha was born into the aristocracy, but renounced his social station[1]. It would be reasonable to suggest that his education and experience of luxury were necessary for his later understanding of the nature of suffering. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha#Biography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha#Biography
- spangry 10y ago
  Well then I guess I'm a bit lost. What exactly is being suggested here? We seem to have established that, for 'many', there's no relationship between material wealth and spirituality (although the people replying to you appear to disagree, but I'm going with your notion). And I think the original post was suggesting that climate change is a consequence of a lack of spirituality. If we take all the above as true, wouldn't this all logically suggest: (a) We're doomed regardless of how many solar panels / wind farms we build, because the root cause (lack of spirituality) remains unaddressed; and (b) To avoid being doomed, we should devote the bulk of our finite efforts and resources towards general public achievement of spiritual enlightenment? And only after this has been achieved, only then might we be able to stave of climate change? Or is something else being suggested? Just my opinion, but I'm not so certain that there's either (a) no relationship between 'spirituality' and material circumstances, or (b) that there's an inverse relationship, as is suggested below (i.e. poor people are more spiritual). I can't see how either of these propositions are self-evidently true. The latter is a nice thought, I guess ("oh, he said the meek! oh isn't that nice!"). It's a similar idea to that of the 'noble savage' I suppose. Going with your notion (i.e. no relationship): I think catastrophic climate change would significantly diminish material resources, in practically every respect. Even 'empty space' will be in shorter supply, due to mass migrations towards relatively unaffected geographies. IMHO, these sorts of 'material privations' (and I don't mean your voluntary weekend fast, here) would bring out the worst, most desperate behaviour in most people, particularly if experienced en masse. I don't think these would be people freed from petty material concerns, and therefore able to pursue 'spirituality'. I suspect they'll instead be people doing whatever it is they need to do to increase the chances of their family's survival. IMHO, the social dislocation caused by catastrophic climate change is one of the few things I could see leading to a violent breakdown of social order, or to the next global scale war. I tend to think these sorts of adversities would lead one away from spiritual enlightenment (unless dying counts as spiritual enlightenment). Would you contend that people were generally more 'spiritual' during the Great Depression? Were they more spiritually enlightened during the world war that followed? Or does one thing have nothing to do with the other?
  - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
    I think I misread your final sentence as we shouldn't do anything because it means we will fall down a few rungs but having re-read it I suspect you meant if we don't do anything we will be forced down a few rungs. To me it is clear we should do something about it but that is unpalatable to many or even most people because they think their lives will be worse without cheap abundant energy. I think they are wrong.

by spangry 10y ago

tonyedgecombe 10y ago

Yet the reality is self-actualisation / spirituality are as out of reach for many now as they were years ago when we were 'poorer'.

virmundi 10y ago
Self-actualization and spirituality seldom go hand in hand with wealth. Poor people have improved spirituality than wealthier people. Wealth draws your focus away from those things onto pleasures like sleeping around, or owning the latest i-device because it's the latest. Hence Jesus saying it's easier to thread a fishing line through a needle than for a wealthy person to find the Kingdom of Heaven.
- openasocket 10y ago
  > Hence Jesus saying it's easier to thread a fishing line through a needle Nit: it's thread a camel through the eye of the needle, not fishing line
  - virmundi 10y ago
    Nope. That's just a shitty English translation. The Jews at the time were familiar with different types of ropes/threads. It is most likely that Jesus referred to the type of rope used in fishing which is much larger than a thread. http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm
    - openasocket 10y ago
      According to that link that is just one of several possible interpretations. In fact the author seems to prefer the "camel" translation, as there are contemporary examples of similar hyperbole.
      - gus_massa 10y ago
        I agree. If "nor an elephant going through the eye of a needle" was a expression used previously, it's not so strange that they have a local version with a camel.
- spangry 10y ago
  If this is indeed the case, does that mean you feel pity for those born into well-off families, and feel happy for those born into abject poverty? The latter, of course, being more likely to live a spiritually fulfilled life?
- blacksmith_tb 10y ago
  Possibly, though it's often more complex than that. For example, the Gautama Buddha was born into the aristocracy, but renounced his social station[1]. It would be reasonable to suggest that his education and experience of luxury were necessary for his later understanding of the nature of suffering. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha#Biography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha#Biography
spangry 10y ago
Well then I guess I'm a bit lost. What exactly is being suggested here? We seem to have established that, for 'many', there's no relationship between material wealth and spirituality (although the people replying to you appear to disagree, but I'm going with your notion). And I think the original post was suggesting that climate change is a consequence of a lack of spirituality. If we take all the above as true, wouldn't this all logically suggest: (a) We're doomed regardless of how many solar panels / wind farms we build, because the root cause (lack of spirituality) remains unaddressed; and (b) To avoid being doomed, we should devote the bulk of our finite efforts and resources towards general public achievement of spiritual enlightenment? And only after this has been achieved, only then might we be able to stave of climate change? Or is something else being suggested? Just my opinion, but I'm not so certain that there's either (a) no relationship between 'spirituality' and material circumstances, or (b) that there's an inverse relationship, as is suggested below (i.e. poor people are more spiritual). I can't see how either of these propositions are self-evidently true. The latter is a nice thought, I guess ("oh, he said the meek! oh isn't that nice!"). It's a similar idea to that of the 'noble savage' I suppose. Going with your notion (i.e. no relationship): I think catastrophic climate change would significantly diminish material resources, in practically every respect. Even 'empty space' will be in shorter supply, due to mass migrations towards relatively unaffected geographies. IMHO, these sorts of 'material privations' (and I don't mean your voluntary weekend fast, here) would bring out the worst, most desperate behaviour in most people, particularly if experienced en masse. I don't think these would be people freed from petty material concerns, and therefore able to pursue 'spirituality'. I suspect they'll instead be people doing whatever it is they need to do to increase the chances of their family's survival. IMHO, the social dislocation caused by catastrophic climate change is one of the few things I could see leading to a violent breakdown of social order, or to the next global scale war. I tend to think these sorts of adversities would lead one away from spiritual enlightenment (unless dying counts as spiritual enlightenment). Would you contend that people were generally more 'spiritual' during the Great Depression? Were they more spiritually enlightened during the world war that followed? Or does one thing have nothing to do with the other?
- tonyedgecombe 10y ago
  I think I misread your final sentence as we shouldn't do anything because it means we will fall down a few rungs but having re-read it I suspect you meant if we don't do anything we will be forced down a few rungs. To me it is clear we should do something about it but that is unpalatable to many or even most people because they think their lives will be worse without cheap abundant energy. I think they are wrong.