7 ms·

Your self-absolution does not a scientific solution make.

by readflaggedcomm 6y ago

forgotmypw17 6y ago
I don't understand what you're saying here...
- kortilla 6y ago
  Your individual reductions in consumption are pointless here. If you just ceased to exist it would not meaningfully move the needle. At this point we need hard societal pressure via laws to make any kind of statistical difference. I’d prefer someone be a hypocrite pushing for legislation to reduce emissions (e.g. Al Gore on a private jet) than someone who reduces locally and calls it good. There are just too many people that don’t care for “local action” to stop the impending doom.
  - mucholove 6y ago
    Better to sing on a sinking ship than to die frustrated, angry and victimized. There is grace in fighting against impending doom. Life can be measured by how we approach things. Never lose hope. :)
    - aardvarkr 6y ago
      Or better to steer the ship using the levers of power that are available to those in power. Fighting a losing battle results in a loss regardless of how valiant the fight. Do what you can to have the greatest impact, which means working with those in power to make societal change.
      - mucholove 6y ago
        Yes. I agree with you. Much better to steer the ship and never hit the iceberg. Some situations are like a jiu-jitsu match where an opponent can pin you down. In a subset of these situations and unlike in a jiu-jitsu match—you can’t tap out. Say you’re in one of these situation. Don’t avoid the feeling provoked by this impending doom. You can’t tap out. You cant restart the match. In such an encounter, grace might mean to keep fighting. Keep thinking. Keep struggling. Recognize your prison. Fortune favors the prepared mind. :)
        bilegeek 6y ago
        Small nitpick: the Titanic tried to steer away from the iceberg too late, and thus the iceberg cut along the side, exposing many more airtight compartments than if they hit head-on. This in no way detracts from your point - unlike the Titanic, steering away from ecological disaster too late will never make things worse, it just won't be enough - but the metaphor isn't quite apt.
    - aarpmcgee 6y ago
      I feel encouraged to see this comment. Thank you for posting it. I've been reading Thomas Merton's _Raids on the Unspeakable_ recently and I sense some of that same heart in what you write.
  - hedora 6y ago
    Put more constructively, you need to have strongly negative carbon emissions at this point. Pick a carbon intensive company or industry, and work to reduce its emissions. Your individual CO2 emissions are rounding error.
    - CameronNemo 6y ago
      Or just implement a carbon tax...
  - beambot 6y ago
    Absolutely false. The earth has 200 million square-miles of area, so your portion of the 7.6 billion people equates to 0.0263 square miles. Do your part to keep that virtual area as clean as possible!
  - jl6 6y ago
    Individual actions are the raw material of a collective shift in mindset that adds up to hard societal pressure to create laws that do make a difference.
    - kortilla 6y ago
      Nope. It doesn’t work that way. Climate change has been mainstream knowledge for 15 years and nothing has meaningfully changed despite plenty of people buying Priuses. The collective shift in mindset of half of the US didn’t do shit and we’re already past the point of irrevocable damage. Hard decisions need to be made (pressure all countries in the world extremely) and you using the iPhone for a few extra years is just placation to avoid real change.
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago
    How do you figure that? If I buy one less Widget, that's one less Widget that needs to be restocked, one less Widget ordered from the factory, one less Widget added to the production requirements estimate, one less Widget's carbon footprint. Seems like simple math to me. If I tell ten people about my strategy and they buy ten fewer Widgets, that's ten fewer Widgets' worth of carbon footprint. If you factor in material mining, transportation, production, transportation, storage, transportation, and packaging trash, that's a lot of reduction. Not only that, my life is simpler, I spend more time making meaning rather than consuming, and am overall happier. Or... I can waste my time trying to affect the political system, which I will never move a nanometer with all my effort, or affecting the corporations, whom I will also not move a nanometer with all my life's effort, etc.
    - kortilla 6y ago
      > How do you figure that? If I buy one less Widget, that's one less Widget that needs to be restocked But that’s fucking useless. It is simple math and the math is that you’ve moved the needle on carbon output from one company by 0.0000001%. An advertising campaign that associates that widget with Devil worshippers probably moves the needle two orders of magnitude more than that. Solving climate change is a global numbers game. If you’re not changing more than your own behavior, you are effectively complicit and not doing anything to stop it. > If I tell ten people about my strategy and they buy ten fewer Widgets, that's ten fewer Widgets' worth of carbon footprint. See, but this is the only bit that has any meaningful effect. This is you being political and affecting change. You’ll quickly realize that your individual reduction is completely irrelevant in total harm you’ve reduced.
- irrational 6y ago
  I think they are saying that your actions might make you feel better, but have no practical value.
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago
    By not buying a Widget, I'm reducing the number of Widgets ordered by one, the number of Widgets produced by one, and the number of Widgets planned for production by one. Not only that, but I'm eliminating all the materials mining, shipping, re-shipping, packaging, re-packaging, and so on, which adds up to quite a bit per Widget. I think you are grossly underestimating the impact of one un-ordered Widget.
    - readflaggedcomm 6y ago
      This is very unscientific, not the least because the cause of the problem is acknowledged as unknown (this is how the scientific method works). But we will be shamed for this change in creative ways, nevertheless. A good crisis must not be wasted, unlike starfish.
      - forgotmypw17 6y ago
        I am not trying to help kelp specifically. I wasn't even aware of this particular thing happening. But I know for sure that every time I spend a dollar on something new, there is a direct chain of multiple events set in motion which does harm to my own habitat as well as those closely related to me.
Hnrobert42 6y ago
All any one person can do is make individual contributions.
- tehjoker 6y ago
  You can also organize politically to get large scale action.
  - elevaet 6y ago
    The worship of individualism has a blind spot to collective action.
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago
    If I put all my effort into politics and forget everything else, I estimate that my effort will amount to as close to zero as I can calculate. On the other hand, by just not ordering one Widget off Amazon, I am making a huge impact, if you count all the materials mining, shipping and re-shipping, packaging and re-packaging, and so on.
scottrogowski 6y ago
Disagree. In a democracy, the only way to make the important policy changes is for the majority of people to be on board with it. Tiny actions by individuals move the needle of public opinion. Additionally, different individuals reducing their consumption in different ways provides a diversity of ideas which can later inspire the so-called "scientific solutions".
- josephg 6y ago
  I hear you; and I'm pretty pessimistic that the "democratic" solution will solve anything. Look at covid - the US's approach to mask wearing seems to be what you're proposing - millions of tiny actions by individuals. The result is over half a million people dead. If those deaths were clustered in SF, that would be every man (or every woman) in San Francisco dead from the pandemic. In comparison here in Australia during the entire pandemic we've only lost 900 people to covid. Single cases make the news here. The difference is that (on this topic) our government has showed real leadership. We haven't left health policy in the hands of millions of individuals. We put health policy in the hands of experts, and then implemented strict policies to get us to 0. Change didn't happen from individuals independently figuring out what to do. Change happened from the country as a whole picking a direction and moving in that direction together. In comparison, Australia has been utterly appalling with climate change. Its a national embarrassment. I don't eat meat and I don't have a car - but I don't think thats going to matter much in the long run. What we need is to do the same thing for the planet that we did for covid - we need effective leadership on climate change. We need to do it together.
  - scottrogowski 6y ago
    My point was less on the benefits/drawbacks of individual decisions and more on the presence of democracy and therefore the need to convince individuals of public policy to make it happen. For the record, I think of democracy as a strictly positive thing even when it seems like democratic societies have erred.
    - josephg 6y ago
vaylian 6y ago
It actually does make sense. Overconsumption is a huge contributor to the problems that we see today. People buying a lot of junk that they don't need leads to wasted resources and overexploited ecosystems.
- Can_Not 6y ago
  Mathematically, using a metaphor, it's like your family is having a budgeting crises, your spouse spends 10k/year on coffee, your kids spend 50k/year on dog patreons, and your accountant's only recommendation is for _you_ to personally look out for and pick up every penny you find in a parking lot.
  - forgotmypw17 6y ago
    I don't think your metaphor is in any way accurate, I think it is disingenious and an attempt to disempower the individual. It's more like both my spouse and I and my kids are each over-spending on a daily basis, and I tell them that we all have to cut our spending, and start doing it first, leading by example, and not buying two lattes per day. I'm not picking pennies in the parking lot, I'm not spending dollars on things, literally! I am amazed at the level of inaccuracy in your metaphor, thank you for that.
- readflaggedcomm 6y ago
  The article isn't about your neuroses, it's about a specific chain reaction of sea life. Soothing your guilt with anticonsumptionism doesn't solve the questions raised.

Your self-absolution does not a scientific solution make.

forgotmypw17 6y ago

I don't understand what you're saying here...

kortilla 6y ago
Your individual reductions in consumption are pointless here. If you just ceased to exist it would not meaningfully move the needle. At this point we need hard societal pressure via laws to make any kind of statistical difference. I’d prefer someone be a hypocrite pushing for legislation to reduce emissions (e.g. Al Gore on a private jet) than someone who reduces locally and calls it good. There are just too many people that don’t care for “local action” to stop the impending doom.
- mucholove 6y ago
  Better to sing on a sinking ship than to die frustrated, angry and victimized. There is grace in fighting against impending doom. Life can be measured by how we approach things. Never lose hope. :)
  - aardvarkr 6y ago
    Or better to steer the ship using the levers of power that are available to those in power. Fighting a losing battle results in a loss regardless of how valiant the fight. Do what you can to have the greatest impact, which means working with those in power to make societal change.
    - mucholove 6y ago
      Yes. I agree with you. Much better to steer the ship and never hit the iceberg. Some situations are like a jiu-jitsu match where an opponent can pin you down. In a subset of these situations and unlike in a jiu-jitsu match—you can’t tap out. Say you’re in one of these situation. Don’t avoid the feeling provoked by this impending doom. You can’t tap out. You cant restart the match. In such an encounter, grace might mean to keep fighting. Keep thinking. Keep struggling. Recognize your prison. Fortune favors the prepared mind. :)
      - bilegeek 6y ago
        Small nitpick: the Titanic tried to steer away from the iceberg too late, and thus the iceberg cut along the side, exposing many more airtight compartments than if they hit head-on. This in no way detracts from your point - unlike the Titanic, steering away from ecological disaster too late will never make things worse, it just won't be enough - but the metaphor isn't quite apt.
  - aarpmcgee 6y ago
    I feel encouraged to see this comment. Thank you for posting it. I've been reading Thomas Merton's _Raids on the Unspeakable_ recently and I sense some of that same heart in what you write.
- hedora 6y ago
  Put more constructively, you need to have strongly negative carbon emissions at this point. Pick a carbon intensive company or industry, and work to reduce its emissions. Your individual CO2 emissions are rounding error.
  - CameronNemo 6y ago
    Or just implement a carbon tax...
- beambot 6y ago
  Absolutely false. The earth has 200 million square-miles of area, so your portion of the 7.6 billion people equates to 0.0263 square miles. Do your part to keep that virtual area as clean as possible!
- jl6 6y ago
  Individual actions are the raw material of a collective shift in mindset that adds up to hard societal pressure to create laws that do make a difference.
  - kortilla 6y ago
    Nope. It doesn’t work that way. Climate change has been mainstream knowledge for 15 years and nothing has meaningfully changed despite plenty of people buying Priuses. The collective shift in mindset of half of the US didn’t do shit and we’re already past the point of irrevocable damage. Hard decisions need to be made (pressure all countries in the world extremely) and you using the iPhone for a few extra years is just placation to avoid real change.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  How do you figure that? If I buy one less Widget, that's one less Widget that needs to be restocked, one less Widget ordered from the factory, one less Widget added to the production requirements estimate, one less Widget's carbon footprint. Seems like simple math to me. If I tell ten people about my strategy and they buy ten fewer Widgets, that's ten fewer Widgets' worth of carbon footprint. If you factor in material mining, transportation, production, transportation, storage, transportation, and packaging trash, that's a lot of reduction. Not only that, my life is simpler, I spend more time making meaning rather than consuming, and am overall happier. Or... I can waste my time trying to affect the political system, which I will never move a nanometer with all my effort, or affecting the corporations, whom I will also not move a nanometer with all my life's effort, etc.
  - kortilla 6y ago
    > How do you figure that? If I buy one less Widget, that's one less Widget that needs to be restocked But that’s fucking useless. It is simple math and the math is that you’ve moved the needle on carbon output from one company by 0.0000001%. An advertising campaign that associates that widget with Devil worshippers probably moves the needle two orders of magnitude more than that. Solving climate change is a global numbers game. If you’re not changing more than your own behavior, you are effectively complicit and not doing anything to stop it. > If I tell ten people about my strategy and they buy ten fewer Widgets, that's ten fewer Widgets' worth of carbon footprint. See, but this is the only bit that has any meaningful effect. This is you being political and affecting change. You’ll quickly realize that your individual reduction is completely irrelevant in total harm you’ve reduced.
irrational 6y ago
I think they are saying that your actions might make you feel better, but have no practical value.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  By not buying a Widget, I'm reducing the number of Widgets ordered by one, the number of Widgets produced by one, and the number of Widgets planned for production by one. Not only that, but I'm eliminating all the materials mining, shipping, re-shipping, packaging, re-packaging, and so on, which adds up to quite a bit per Widget. I think you are grossly underestimating the impact of one un-ordered Widget.
  - readflaggedcomm 6y ago
    This is very unscientific, not the least because the cause of the problem is acknowledged as unknown (this is how the scientific method works). But we will be shamed for this change in creative ways, nevertheless. A good crisis must not be wasted, unlike starfish.
    - forgotmypw17 6y ago
      I am not trying to help kelp specifically. I wasn't even aware of this particular thing happening. But I know for sure that every time I spend a dollar on something new, there is a direct chain of multiple events set in motion which does harm to my own habitat as well as those closely related to me.

Hnrobert42 6y ago

All any one person can do is make individual contributions.

tehjoker 6y ago
You can also organize politically to get large scale action.
- elevaet 6y ago
  The worship of individualism has a blind spot to collective action.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  If I put all my effort into politics and forget everything else, I estimate that my effort will amount to as close to zero as I can calculate. On the other hand, by just not ordering one Widget off Amazon, I am making a huge impact, if you count all the materials mining, shipping and re-shipping, packaging and re-packaging, and so on.

scottrogowski 6y ago

Disagree. In a democracy, the only way to make the important policy changes is for the majority of people to be on board with it. Tiny actions by individuals move the needle of public opinion. Additionally, different individuals reducing their consumption in different ways provides a diversity of ideas which can later inspire the so-called "scientific solutions".

josephg 6y ago
I hear you; and I'm pretty pessimistic that the "democratic" solution will solve anything. Look at covid - the US's approach to mask wearing seems to be what you're proposing - millions of tiny actions by individuals. The result is over half a million people dead. If those deaths were clustered in SF, that would be every man (or every woman) in San Francisco dead from the pandemic. In comparison here in Australia during the entire pandemic we've only lost 900 people to covid. Single cases make the news here. The difference is that (on this topic) our government has showed real leadership. We haven't left health policy in the hands of millions of individuals. We put health policy in the hands of experts, and then implemented strict policies to get us to 0. Change didn't happen from individuals independently figuring out what to do. Change happened from the country as a whole picking a direction and moving in that direction together. In comparison, Australia has been utterly appalling with climate change. Its a national embarrassment. I don't eat meat and I don't have a car - but I don't think thats going to matter much in the long run. What we need is to do the same thing for the planet that we did for covid - we need effective leadership on climate change. We need to do it together.
- scottrogowski 6y ago
  My point was less on the benefits/drawbacks of individual decisions and more on the presence of democracy and therefore the need to convince individuals of public policy to make it happen. For the record, I think of democracy as a strictly positive thing even when it seems like democratic societies have erred.
  - josephg 6y ago

vaylian 6y ago

It actually does make sense. Overconsumption is a huge contributor to the problems that we see today. People buying a lot of junk that they don't need leads to wasted resources and overexploited ecosystems.

Can_Not 6y ago
Mathematically, using a metaphor, it's like your family is having a budgeting crises, your spouse spends 10k/year on coffee, your kids spend 50k/year on dog patreons, and your accountant's only recommendation is for _you_ to personally look out for and pick up every penny you find in a parking lot.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  I don't think your metaphor is in any way accurate, I think it is disingenious and an attempt to disempower the individual. It's more like both my spouse and I and my kids are each over-spending on a daily basis, and I tell them that we all have to cut our spending, and start doing it first, leading by example, and not buying two lattes per day. I'm not picking pennies in the parking lot, I'm not spending dollars on things, literally! I am amazed at the level of inaccuracy in your metaphor, thank you for that.
readflaggedcomm 6y ago
The article isn't about your neuroses, it's about a specific chain reaction of sea life. Soothing your guilt with anticonsumptionism doesn't solve the questions raised.