3 ms·
Then (forgive me if I'm mistaken here) it seems like you are probably clinging to the Enlightenment myths of human supremacy and inevitable 'progress'. To be an
by crispinb 7y ago
Then (forgive me if I'm mistaken here) it seems like you are probably clinging to the Enlightenment myths of human supremacy and inevitable 'progress'. To be angry that humans aren't transcending physical and ecological reality implies that you think it was possible to have done so. A bit like a lapsed Catholic still feeling guilty in the face of accusations from a God that they claim to no longer believe in.
- titzer 7y agoHaha, there is some truth to what you say. I was indeed raised Catholic, but I'm an atheist now. No, I think that there is a case to be made that wanton destruction is morally bad and I think my values stem from that. We wouldn't be in such a bad pickle if our population wasn't nearing 8 billion. How much of that is really necessary to support one of the giant spires of our technological thrust? A million? A hundred million? I don't think even a billion humans would be necessary for all of the tech behind the computer industry.
- crispinb 7y agoI hear you. Coming from one of the rogue nationx when it comes to climate change, I have my moments too. Still, on reflection, I'm pretty sure our current trajectory was inevitable the moment humans developed agriculture. We're the wildly pullulating caterpillar devouring our tree, and always were going to be just what we are. Just another species. Just another dead end in evolution's exploration of ecological state space.
- titzer 7y agoYeah, I pretty much agree with you about agriculture, especially after reading "Sapiens" by Hariri. > We're the wildly pullulating caterpillar devouring our tree, and always were going to be just what we are. It's really mind-blowing to think of us as a planetary-scale caterpillar. Thanks for the analogy! Cheers.