5 ms·

> Perhaps they realized one fewer booking doesn't prevent the flight from happening Ah, the good old "collective action by individuals is useless because indiv

> Perhaps they realized one fewer booking doesn't prevent the flight from happening Ah, the good old "collective action by individuals is useless because individual action by individuals is useless" canard.

Alupis 2y ago
I think you missed the part where even if 100% of academics committed to not flying, still not one thing changes. The "do something, anything!" crowd needs reality checks from time to time. Consider yourself checked...
- etrautmann 2y ago
  This is useless and lazy nihilism
  - timr 2y ago
    Arguing that travel you don't like is unnecessary because it harms the environment? Yes, that is useless and lazy nihilism. OP is arguing that observed preferences are far more reliable indicators of what people actually value than what people say to surveyors/the press/reddit/HN. That's not "nilhilism", it's just a fact. Presumably, academics travel to conferences because they're getting value out of it, and they deem that value worth whatever costs they believe it incurs.
    - etrautmann 2y ago
      I was in and among that set for the last 12 years. Plenty of people travel for fun because someone else is paying. Many conferences are nowhere near a central location and instead are in somewhere exotic because one of the organizers wanted it there. This never sat well with me, but is completely standard and almost never questioned.
      - timr 2y ago
        Sure, ok. Let's posit that the value they're getting is that they enjoy travel, and wish to do it. My response is the same.
- matsemann 2y ago
  This reminds a bit of the "it's useless to do anything here, China should cut their emissions, not us, we're a mere drop in the ocean!" Which of course means that we can solve climate change by dividing the earth into smaller countries, all too small to have any positive effect by cleaning up their act :)
  - Alupis 2y ago
    It's really unfortunate people cannot fathom how insignificant your butt in an airplane seat, that will take off with or without you, really is. This climate change thing really has become people's new religion. Deny anything that doesn't align with the religion. Commit to meaningless gestures. Say your three hail marys. Who can suffer the most in the name of our lord? It makes you a better person, don't you know?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - quantified 2y ago
      It's the sufficient collection of butts absent that gets the plane not to even be scheduled. Funny how the pandemic quieted things down. (Though perversely, airlines flew plenty of empty planes to keep their gates, just the way our economic incentives are structured.) So academics on their own, no, maybe just a couple of charter flights here and there. Broad-based reduction would be required, for example reducing the sizes of the planes on some routes. These aspects are more meaningless because of the way other humans behave, but it's all a question of degree. It's insignificant whether you urinate into someone's locker at the gym, so we can all do that every day, right?
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    Well the world isn't divided like that, so since there are groups big enough to have an impact that we can influence, why don't we focus on them?
- Cheer2171 2y ago
  Thanks for the reality check, buddy. You're right that nothing any of us does ever really matters in the grand scheme of things. There is no way we could ever try to get others to change their behavior by first changing our own. Collective action has never, ever worked. I'd been keeping my used batteries and motor oil for a special trip to the recycling center, but I just threw them in the river behind my house, because it turns out nothing we do matters because climate change actually can't be fixed unless we fix corrupt multinational corporations or governments or China, or maybe climate change is all a hoax, or whatever lets you sleep at night and feel morally superior to all the other sheep. Thanks for the inspiration, friend.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > Collective action has never, ever worked. This is a gross misreading of what they said. They said that one particular collective isn't big enough.
    - Cheer2171 2y ago
      No, they said that one fewer butt in one particular seat won't make a difference. That's true about everything any one particular individual can do about climate change. You could commit euthanasia and never be responsible for another gram of carbon emitted, and that would not have a measurable effect on CO2 levels. OP is trying to force a very narrow utilitarian framework in which actions are evaluated based only on their immediate consequences. By that logic, nothing any ordinary, median individual does will directly have a measurable impact on climate change. The fallacy is that these kinds of boycotts and self-restrictions, which are part of the "religion" OP is objecting to in other replies, is the way to get large numbers of individuals to change their behavior collectively in ways that do measurably impact the bottom line. If demand for air travel drops, fewer planes will burn carbon. The other fallacy is that utilitarianism is only one way of considering how to act ethically in the world.
      - Alupis 2y ago
        So if the UK banned all airplanes - what changes for the world? Oh, that's right. Still nothing. You are hyper-focused on a meaningless gesture that you were told to believe by people who continue to fly private jets around the world - like the academics this very thread is about. Seriously... let that sink in for a few moments. You should suffer, while they enjoy the lavishes of life. Kind of like a tv megachurch evangelist. If you want to be principled and refuse to ever fly again - fine. It doesn't harm anyone but yourself. The world won't even thank you for this meaningless gesture and countless wasted hours. Just don't stand on a busy street corner shouting "repent" into your megaphone.

Alupis 2y ago

I think you missed the part where even if 100% of academics committed to not flying, still not one thing changes. The "do something, anything!" crowd needs reality checks from time to time. Consider yourself checked...

etrautmann 2y ago
This is useless and lazy nihilism
- timr 2y ago
  Arguing that travel you don't like is unnecessary because it harms the environment? Yes, that is useless and lazy nihilism. OP is arguing that observed preferences are far more reliable indicators of what people actually value than what people say to surveyors/the press/reddit/HN. That's not "nilhilism", it's just a fact. Presumably, academics travel to conferences because they're getting value out of it, and they deem that value worth whatever costs they believe it incurs.
  - etrautmann 2y ago
    I was in and among that set for the last 12 years. Plenty of people travel for fun because someone else is paying. Many conferences are nowhere near a central location and instead are in somewhere exotic because one of the organizers wanted it there. This never sat well with me, but is completely standard and almost never questioned.
    - timr 2y ago
      Sure, ok. Let's posit that the value they're getting is that they enjoy travel, and wish to do it. My response is the same.
matsemann 2y ago
This reminds a bit of the "it's useless to do anything here, China should cut their emissions, not us, we're a mere drop in the ocean!" Which of course means that we can solve climate change by dividing the earth into smaller countries, all too small to have any positive effect by cleaning up their act :)
- Alupis 2y ago
  It's really unfortunate people cannot fathom how insignificant your butt in an airplane seat, that will take off with or without you, really is. This climate change thing really has become people's new religion. Deny anything that doesn't align with the religion. Commit to meaningless gestures. Say your three hail marys. Who can suffer the most in the name of our lord? It makes you a better person, don't you know?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - quantified 2y ago
    It's the sufficient collection of butts absent that gets the plane not to even be scheduled. Funny how the pandemic quieted things down. (Though perversely, airlines flew plenty of empty planes to keep their gates, just the way our economic incentives are structured.) So academics on their own, no, maybe just a couple of charter flights here and there. Broad-based reduction would be required, for example reducing the sizes of the planes on some routes. These aspects are more meaningless because of the way other humans behave, but it's all a question of degree. It's insignificant whether you urinate into someone's locker at the gym, so we can all do that every day, right?
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  Well the world isn't divided like that, so since there are groups big enough to have an impact that we can influence, why don't we focus on them?
Cheer2171 2y ago
Thanks for the reality check, buddy. You're right that nothing any of us does ever really matters in the grand scheme of things. There is no way we could ever try to get others to change their behavior by first changing our own. Collective action has never, ever worked. I'd been keeping my used batteries and motor oil for a special trip to the recycling center, but I just threw them in the river behind my house, because it turns out nothing we do matters because climate change actually can't be fixed unless we fix corrupt multinational corporations or governments or China, or maybe climate change is all a hoax, or whatever lets you sleep at night and feel morally superior to all the other sheep. Thanks for the inspiration, friend.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > Collective action has never, ever worked. This is a gross misreading of what they said. They said that one particular collective isn't big enough.
  - Cheer2171 2y ago
    No, they said that one fewer butt in one particular seat won't make a difference. That's true about everything any one particular individual can do about climate change. You could commit euthanasia and never be responsible for another gram of carbon emitted, and that would not have a measurable effect on CO2 levels. OP is trying to force a very narrow utilitarian framework in which actions are evaluated based only on their immediate consequences. By that logic, nothing any ordinary, median individual does will directly have a measurable impact on climate change. The fallacy is that these kinds of boycotts and self-restrictions, which are part of the "religion" OP is objecting to in other replies, is the way to get large numbers of individuals to change their behavior collectively in ways that do measurably impact the bottom line. If demand for air travel drops, fewer planes will burn carbon. The other fallacy is that utilitarianism is only one way of considering how to act ethically in the world.
    - Alupis 2y ago
      So if the UK banned all airplanes - what changes for the world? Oh, that's right. Still nothing. You are hyper-focused on a meaningless gesture that you were told to believe by people who continue to fly private jets around the world - like the academics this very thread is about. Seriously... let that sink in for a few moments. You should suffer, while they enjoy the lavishes of life. Kind of like a tv megachurch evangelist. If you want to be principled and refuse to ever fly again - fine. It doesn't harm anyone but yourself. The world won't even thank you for this meaningless gesture and countless wasted hours. Just don't stand on a busy street corner shouting "repent" into your megaphone.