3 ms·

Not “technology will save us” - human creativity can save us. It has in the past and survival will require our creativity infinitely into the future. You may l

Not “technology will save us” - human creativity can save us. It has in the past and survival will require our creativity infinitely into the future. You may laugh but let’s tslk again in 30 years. When avg temps rise more than the 1 degree they have so far, political attitudes will change. Overpopulation prophesy from 50 years ago. At the time 1 in 4 people globally were in famine and author prophecized it would only get worse. Instead global population has doubled while worldwide hunger reduced to 1 in 10, due to creativity and technology. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/book-incited-worldwide-fear-overpopulation-180967499/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/book-incited-world...

coldtea 7y ago
>Not “technology will save us” - human creativity can save us. It has in the past and survival will require our creativity infinitely into the future. Well, when discussing practical solutions to problems, creativity/technology is more or less same thing. >You may laugh but let’s tslk again in 30 years. When avg temps rise more than the 1 degree they have so far, political attitudes will change. They could very well change for the inverse: people/countries being more selfish, fiercely fighting to save their own (and why not? In a world of fewer resources / access to good stuff / areas with declining climate, that could be a wining move). "Human creativity" didn't save the huge Babylonian empire from being reduced to dust, the huge Roman empire from declining (and entering centuries of "dark ages"), and so on. And those were just political issues, not political + environmental, like today. And of course there's also the inverse argument: we haven't signed any contract that something that worked in the past (e.g. creativity solving some problem) will work in the future too.

coldtea 7y ago

>Not “technology will save us” - human creativity can save us. It has in the past and survival will require our creativity infinitely into the future. Well, when discussing practical solutions to problems, creativity/technology is more or less same thing. >You may laugh but let’s tslk again in 30 years. When avg temps rise more than the 1 degree they have so far, political attitudes will change. They could very well change for the inverse: people/countries being more selfish, fiercely fighting to save their own (and why not? In a world of fewer resources / access to good stuff / areas with declining climate, that could be a wining move). "Human creativity" didn't save the huge Babylonian empire from being reduced to dust, the huge Roman empire from declining (and entering centuries of "dark ages"), and so on. And those were just political issues, not political + environmental, like today. And of course there's also the inverse argument: we haven't signed any contract that something that worked in the past (e.g. creativity solving some problem) will work in the future too.