Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[siledre]

here's my thought on your writing, anyone that can't make a point in one sentence is thinking to much.

 

[sushil yadav]

A lot of jobs are entirely unecessary. We create meaningless work for people to do becaues we assign purchasing power according to the value of one's labor, but now machines do all the work for us so we have to come up with worthless work, so that people can continue to buy the products of Industry. Over 98% of all labor today is performed by machines. If we simply eliminated all the useless and wasteful production (and related employment) we are engaged in today, and banned the use of non-renewable and non-recyclable materials/energy, than we could produce an abundance of necessary goods (food, shelter, clothing, medicine, etc) that would essentially be free. Of course, human greed will probably prevent this from ever happening.

Compared to man's jungle, nature's jungle is simple and sensible! The so-called civilized man kills for ideals and beliefs while the animals kill only for survival.

anything beyond the basic necessities of survival is "more than you need"....

A person is being stabbed repeatedly at regular intervals - every hour.

Some people are trying to save the victim.

The sane way to save is - you first stop the attack – you prevent the attack.

What these insane people do - they allow the attack to be continued. They don’t stop it -- they don’t prevent it.

Instead, what they do - They say we are going to save the victim by using technology - the best technology - the best medical care.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

They give the victim the best technology - the best medical care.
In the meantime the stabbing continues – every hour – even while the best medical care is being given.

One can imagine the fate of the victim.



Ecosystems are getting destroyed due to production of consumer goods.

Every consumer good is made by killing animals, trees, air, water and land - directly or indirectly. [ more killing of nature takes place when consumer goods are used and discarded]

Industrial society is destroying necessary things - animals, trees, air, water and land for making unnecessary things - consumer goods.

The sane way of saving ecosystems is - you stop production of consumer goods - you reduce production of consumer goods to the minimum level.

But the insane Industrial Society continues producing consumer goods [ in fact production is being increased every day]

The insane response of Industrial Society is - We will save the environment with technology - the best technology.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

In the meantime production of consumer goods continues - 3 billion people living in cities are continuously engaged in - making , buying and selling of consumer goods - killing the ecosystems moment by moment.

One can imagine the fate of environment.



Height of Insanity.......Height of Abnormality.

Destroy Industrial Society.....before it is too late.
Destroy consumerism..... before it is too late.



sushil_yadav

Corrupt
ePhilosopher
ForeignPolicy

Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

 

[kmguru]

Logic 98:

The Milk is white and the paper is white, therefore, grind up the paper and drink it....

 

[BlueMoose]

Excellent post Sushil.
I see not many have understand it.
I have see a new trend here, lots of young people starting to utilize old craftsman skills, moving out of cities to country side, starting small farms and suchs.
The way the food prices are going up there is economical motivation to grow own food and fishing isnt just for fun anymore and so on. Its not done basing on economic factors only, its done for mental health also, people tend to be more relaxed in nature, or its the opposite when the one is disconnected from the nature in mind, one wont enjoy it physically either.
The age of pisces, two fish swimming on opposite directions, the separation of men from nature, mater from mind and so on, its still continuing while quantum physics has prove that there is no separation,
so yes indeed, we are programmed to fight ourself.
Mind over mater or Mater over mind ?

 

[sushil yadav]

Excellent post Sushil.
I see not many have understand it.
I have see a new trend here, lots of young people starting to utilize old craftsman skills, moving out of cities to country side, starting small farms and suchs.
The way the food prices are going up there is economical motivation to grow own food and fishing isnt just for fun anymore and so on. Its not done basing on economic factors only, its done for mental health also, people tend to be more relaxed in nature, or its the opposite when the one is disconnected from the nature in mind, one wont enjoy it physically either.
The age of pisces, two fish swimming on opposite directions, the separation of men from nature, mater from mind and so on, its still continuing while quantum physics has prove that there is no separation,
so yes indeed, we are programmed to fight ourself.
Mind over mater or Mater over mind ?

BlueMoose,

Humans have spent more than 99% of their time on earth in non-industrial societies.

It is highly amazing that people have taken for granted a lifestyle that has barely existed for 50 - 100 years.

People started thinking "this is the way to live".

This is not the way to live - This is the way to die.

Industrial Society has destroyed necessary things[animals, trees, air, water and land] for making unnecessary things[consumer goods].

People who are going for infinite growth and development on a small planet [whose circumference is just 40,000 km] are insane, abnormal and criminal.


In the context of Industrial Society someone has said :

"It is like adding extra floors to your building by removing bricks from the lower floor/ foundation."



sushil_yadav
Corrupt
ePhilosopher
ForeignPolicy
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

 

[superluminal]

People who are going for infinite growth and development on a small planet [whose circumference is just 40,000 km] are insane, abnormal and criminal.

I completely agree. I can think of another word for unconstrained growth - cancer. We are not satisfied to reach a level of maturity and then live sustainably, in harmony with our resources. And that behavior is now killing us all.

 

[wesmorris]

yes, the largest human population in the history of earth is definately evidence of all of us "being killed".

 

[superluminal]

Yes. The largest human population in the history of earth, with the highest rates of death from wars (over resources) and poverty and starvation (due to lack of resources) and disease (due to unsupportable overpopulation itself) and increasing environmental instability (due to overuse of resources by too many) is definately evidence of all of us "being killed".

A cancer dosen't kill you outright. At first you don't even know you have it, then it makes you sick, then miserable, then progressively unable to function at all, then dead, all at an increasing pace.

What phase do you think we're in?

Or do you not see an end game to this lovely unconstrained "growth" we're all so fond of?

 

[wesmorris]

unconstrained growth? that's simply ignorant.

there are a LOT of contraints on growth, yet we thus far have managed to continue growing.

your pessimistic hippy musings about gloom and doom completely lack objectivity.

it's funny that you mention contraints in the same breath that you say there are none.

resources for instance, contrain population growth.

so does war.

so does environmental instability (assuming you can't adapt).

seriously man, pull your head out of your ass - you're a smart dude.

 

[superluminal]

unconstrained growth? that's simply ignorant.

there are a LOT of contraints on growth, yet we thus far have managed to continue growing.

your pessimistic hippy musings about gloom and doom completely lack objectivity.

it's funny that you mention contraints in the same breath that you say there are none.

resources for instance, contrain population growth.

so does war.

so does environmental instability (assuming you can't adapt).

seriously man, pull your head out of your ass - you're a smart dude.

Dude, you're kidding, right? You completely miss the point. Amazingly far off the mark for someone who usually seems pretty intelligent.

Of course those things are ultimate constraints. The point is to not reach them and let war, famine, disease, and environmental collapse be the control mechanisms. Sheesh! Who's the freakin' pessimist?

You really want to keep your head in the sand while the realities of intentional growth beyond sustainability come up and kick you in the ass?

I think that everything I posted can be demonstrated as objectively true. Are you claiming that, objectively speaking, we are models of moderation and are not, as a whole, living like there's no tomorrow? Or is it the red-white-and-blue US of A blinders you're wearing?

 

[wesmorris]

Dude, you're kidding, right?

No. It's that you apparently don't realize what the words you're using mean.

Of course those things are ultimate constraints.

Oh so those are "ultimate"? They're the same constraints that have always limited population growth, and the most likely will continue to do so until our evolution by choice renders us a different species.

The point is to not reach them and let war, famine, disease, and environmental collapse be the control mechanisms.

"reach them"??????????????

THIS is having your head in the sand.

They have always been, and remain today. Your emotional sensibilities reject the notion on the basis that they're ugly and reek of grim death. I get it. But this is why I say you completely lack any attempt toward objectivity. You're trying to pretend it's "something we reach" rather than the more grim reality that "they've always been". I understand the sentiment, but find it quite lacking when trying to understand anything substantial about the development of the species.

Sheesh! Who's the freakin' pessimist?

Realism is far from pessimism, though from your vantage point (head up your ass) it's easy to imagine how the two would look the same.

This reminds me of a certain episode of southpark, something about smug.

You really want to keep your head in the sand while the realities of intentional growth beyond sustainability come up and kick you in the ass?

*sigh*

That is a stupid question.

I ask you to pull your head out of your ass, so you accuse me of having my head in the sand. Impressive. You apparently have decided I'm a suicidal moron who's hell-bent on destroying all in my path? Genius.

No you see, if you could think beyond your childish expectation, and look to what's really at work here... you might get a glimpse of a grandiose ballet of mammoth proportions, a balance of a gazillion interacting entities, ideas, etc. What I see is a system pushing in a direction it will sway back from, one way or another. What I think is that attempts to directly control such a sway usually only amplifies in a way that seems to generally eventually turn out poorly. I trust in a weird way, that the aggregate of individual choice will lead the path of least resistance into the future and ultimately be the most efficient route of human evolution. I think I see that unreasonably limiting that personal choice actually diminishes the strength of the species over time.

I'm not entirely sure about any of that, but I'm trying to understand the system - not thrust my concern for personal or some idealized notion of welfare onto it.

I must be doing so poorly though, having not conformed to the demands you apparently find unquestionable.

I think that everything I posted can be demonstrated as objectively true.

No, actually it can't because if you ran the numbers you'd see that regardless of the constraints we've still managed to grow and continue to do so. Well, and techically your statement "killing us all" is either a non-statement (because technically we're all, always dying - some more slowly than others) or it's flatly false. For instance nothing is killing my children directly at the moment besides the inevitable march of time.

Are you claiming that, objectively speaking, we are models of moderation and are not, as a whole, living like there's no tomorrow?

Apparently you've just expressed some idealized standard of yours in which everything is 'hunky dory' and all live in peace throughout eternity in balance with nature singing and dancing lalalal.

I don't see the relevance of moderation in the expressed context, nor that we could possibily "live as a whole" in any meaningful manner. I think I see that you somehow expect to control the individual to conform what you've decided is the appropriate level of moderation, and that you similarly expect "we, as a whole" should conform to your expectations. This reeks of unbound ego.

Or is it the red-white-and-blue US of A blinders you're wearing?

If I'm blind, how would I know what blinders I was wearing? Should I believe you when you tell me they're red, white and blue? Should I take into consideration the discolaration you surely experience through your rose-colored imposition?

 

[Roman]

They have always been, and remain today. Your emotional sensibilities reject the notion on the basis that they're ugly and reek of grim death. I get it. But this is why I say you completely lack any attempt toward objectivity. You're trying to pretend it's "something we reach" rather than the more grim reality that "they've always been". I understand the sentiment, but find it quite lacking when trying to understand anything substantial about the development of the species.

Do they limit you wes? No. Not in the way it limits Sub-Saharan wes. I would really prefer it if my living conditions, and those of my children or grand children, didn't become that. In fact, I would like it if they had better living conditions.

No you see, if you could think beyond your childish expectation, and look to what's really at work here... you might get a glimpse of a grandiose ballet of mammoth proportions, a balance of a gazillion interacting entities, ideas, etc. What I see is a system pushing in a direction it will sway back from, one way or another. What I think is that attempts to directly control such a sway usually only amplifies in a way that seems to generally eventually turn out poorly. I trust in a weird way, that the aggregate of individual choice will lead the path of least resistance into the future and ultimately be the most efficient route of human evolution. I think I see that unreasonably limiting that personal choice actually diminishes the strength of the species over time.

I'm not entirely sure about any of that, but I'm trying to understand the system - not thrust my concern for personal or some idealized notion of welfare onto it.

I must be doing so poorly though, having not conformed to the demands you apparently find unquestionable.

What if the future of our species, should we continue to destroy the environment, leads to living out of the garbage heaps of past civilization, living like rats on the decayed remnants of what we once were? That doesn't sound very desirable.

 

[superluminal]

I ask you to pull your head out of your ass, so you accuse me of having my head in the sand. Impressive. You apparently have decided I'm a suicidal moron who's hell-bent on destroying all in my path? Genius.

No. Just a little disturbed.

No you see, if you could think beyond your childish expectation, and look to what's really at work here... you might get a glimpse of a grandiose ballet of mammoth proportions, a balance of a gazillion interacting entities, ideas, etc. What I see is a system pushing in a direction it will sway back from, one way or another. What I think is that attempts to directly control such a sway usually only amplifies in a way that seems to generally eventually turn out poorly. I trust in a weird way, that the aggregate of individual choice will lead the path of least resistance into the future and ultimately be the most efficient route of human evolution. I think I see that unreasonably limiting that personal choice actually diminishes the strength of the species over time.

I'm not entirely sure about any of that, but I'm trying to understand the system - not thrust my concern for personal or some idealized notion of welfare onto it.

Sadly, you appear to have had some sort of breakdown wes. Did the realization of the complexity of the planetary system and your inability to deal with it drive you over the edge? You seem to see the grand picture there bub, in a way that most would consider a bit insane.

The aggregate of individual human choice, if left to it's own devices, will wear the planet down until, as Roman alludes to, we will all be living like rats on the remains of a resourceless planet. Way to go.

I well understand human nature in aggregate and it is a very single-minded, self centered beast. The very few with the knowledge and forsight to help guide this hungry beast are your best hope.

I'm not sure why you appear to have become such a raving fucking asshole. I made the claim that, in a general sense, we are "killing ourselves" (a bit of poetic license?) through unconstrained (meaning we impose very few constraints on ourselves regarding what we do with our limited resources and their effects on the environment) growth.

I trust in a weird way, that the aggregate of individual choice will lead the path of least resistance into the future and ultimately be the most efficient route of human evolution.

You trust???

path of least resistance into the future???

human evolution???

You've absolutely lost it. You claim that I'm not being objective and am some sort of barely functioning child with a deluded perspective? I'm just a little bit interested in NOT driving this train blindly into the shit can. But I get it. Autopilot is just fine with you. Let's leave well enough (or not) alone and see what happens! Yay for the marching morons!



Check yourself in now man, before it's too late.

 

[wesmorris]

Do they limit you wes? No.

Hmm.. I don't think I qualify as an entire population...yet. Give me time.

Not in the way it limits Sub-Saharan wes. I would really prefer it if my living conditions, and those of my children or grand children, didn't become that. In fact, I would like it if they had better living conditions.

Sure. I don't wish ill upon many either and presume I'd like my grandkids to have a decent place to live and such.

What if the future of our species, should we continue to destroy the environment, leads to living out of the garbage heaps of past civilization, living like rats on the decayed remnants of what we once were? That doesn't sound very desirable.

Like tons of people aren't doing tons of things to figure out how to clean up the environment. You and super seem pretty concerned, I'm a little concerned, etc. Most people with a reasonable mind are somewhat concerned and will do stuff to help given the opportunity, and some make careers and such in the field.

You act like nobody cares and nothing is being done. Super speaks of the species basically as a tumor that should behave as he desires or cease to exist.

I'm just sayin...

He said "unconstrained growth" and "killing all of us". I called bullshit.

simple.

 

[wesmorris]

No. Just a little disturbed.

k then.

Sadly, you appear to have had some sort of breakdown wes. Did the realization of the complexity of the planetary system and your inability to deal with it drive you over the edge? You seem to see the grand picture there bub, in a way that most would consider a bit insane.

well, as someone who considers most people insane that seems par for the course. no breakdown though, sorry. doom and gloom bullshit simply annoys me. failure to recognize that lots of people are trying to do good things and many are succeeding also annoys me. focus on the negative without a broader realization and claims such as "killing us all" blah blah reek of smug egoism to me. you don't have to agree, but you're spewing bullshit and I'm calling you on it.

The aggregate of individual human choice, if left to it's own devices, will wear the planet down until, as Roman alludes to, we will all be living like rats on the remains of a resourceless planet. Way to go.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. The planet is a planet. I don't think it cares, as it has no mind with which to do so it would seem. You're ignoring all that is good to indulge your perception of what is bad. It's typical and somewhat less than I'd expect from you.

I well understand human nature in aggregate and it is a very single-minded, self centered beast. The very few with the knowledge and forsight to help guide this hungry beast are your best hope.

Lol, see, this is what I mean. That's just bullshit yet you spew it as gospel. I don't think you understand a shit thing about human nature if this is the best you can offer. A single-minded, self-centered beast is techinically exactly what one shoudl request if looking for a survivor no? It would at least fit the bill? I'm just sayin... It's not necessarily my preference, but then again I"m only part of nature - I'm not responsible for all of it.

I'm not sure why you appear to have become such a raving fucking asshole.

I think you're being a negative nancy and called you on bullshit, so to you I'm now an asshole for it. *shrug* Okay then.

I made the claim that, in a general sense, we are "killing ourselves" (a bit of poetic license?) through unconstrained (meaning we impose very few constraints on ourselves regarding what we do with our limited resources and their effects on the environment) growth.

I know, but I think there is very little truth to that claim. It reeks of projecting your expectation onto the world, rather than trying to understand the world (nature) for what it is, and how we are within it. There are many, many wonderful people who'd give you the shirt off their back, recycle stupid shit, or whatever the shit you'd have them do to make a better world, yet you fuck them all to shit in completely ignoring the goodness to indulge your apparently bloated and negatively biased ego.

You know I'm a decent dude I'm sure, but would rather think I'm an asshole than possibly question your assertion of how we're all being killed by how horrible humans are.

I'm a proponent of the species, so fuck your negative bullshit.

You trust???

you don't? then how the fuck do you think we made it this far? further, what does it matter if I do or don't? If I don't, I could have a sour sammich for lunch like you? I'll pass thanks.

path of least resistance into the future???

uh, yeah?

human evolution???

si. isn't that basically what's on trial here? aren't you worried about us "raping the planet" or whatever you said and dying?

You've absolutely lost it.

if it's more convenient for you to think that, then please feel free.

You claim that I'm not being objective and am some sort of barely functioning child with a deluded perspective?

Yes, and i think I supported it decently.

I'm just a little bit interested in NOT driving this train blindly into the shit can. But I get it. Autopilot is just fine with you.

It's not exactly "autopilot". It's people, performing their function, whatever they adapt that function to be. Sort of autopilot, sure what the hell. It's not "fine with me" or "not fine with me". From my observation, it seems to be the most efficient path to maximal satisfaction.

And pardon if I wouldn't trust your eye as the keenest, but someone who can see only despair has tunnel fucking vision, so I really wouldn't want YOU driving the goddamned train, yet you seem to insist you know how it should be done. Either that or you REALLY have no substance to your argument.

Let's leave well enough (or not) alone and see what happens! Yay for the marching morons!

Funny. It doesn't seem to me you've really thought the whole "road to hell, paved with good intentions" thing through very far.

Check yourself in now man, before it's too late.

Yes, you say I have a problem so it must be true.

You really should consider my history of having thought things through farther than you and ponder the remote possibility that this could again be the case. I don't say that to "one up" or anything. I don't want to trash you, I don't want to be smarter than you. I don't care what I am compared to you. I just wonder if you've really tried to ponder if there's the most remote possibility that you're a little on the negative side and perhaps have ignored a few things that render your claims less valid than you seemed to have asserted them to be.

Hell maybe I'm just not as smart as you might have thought I was. Maybe I'm just evil eh? Maybe my perception of my own good intentions is simply a ruse I use to make it through each day.

Or maybe it's you?

How we gonna know?

 

[Roman]

Like tons of people aren't doing tons of things to figure out how to clean up the environment.

And people like you don't listen to them when they tell us what needs to be done.

Wes, ecosystems have been collapsing around us for, well, for as long as we've been watching. In places where they can't export that cost, they live in really miserable conditions. Conditions I would prefer not to inflict on anyone- much less my offspring.

I'm not predicting some sort of future where we all go extinct- just a huge loss of standard of living for most of us, if[/i] we don't figure out a way to put value on the positive externalities of maintaining intact ecosystems.

 

[wesmorris]

And people like you don't listen to them when they tell us what needs to be done.

Why would you think that? I definately listen.

Wes, ecosystems have been collapsing around us for, well, for as long as we've been watching. In places where they can't export that cost, they live in really miserable conditions. Conditions I would prefer not to inflict on anyone- much less my offspring.

What does that have to do with anything? You seem to insinuate that "people like me" desire that outcome. Please Roman, don't make me start thinking of "people like you" as if you should be categorized so distantly and generally. Honestly if I'm simply "people like me" to you, please put me on your goddamned ignore list. What a shitty thing to say.

Have you considered you might be reading more into what I've said than I actually said? "people like you" seem to do that.

I'm not predicting some sort of future where we all go extinct- just a huge loss of standard of living for most of us, if[/i] we don't figure out a way to put value on the positive externalities of maintaining intact ecosystems.

But there IS value on that, lots of it from lots of people. Some put dollar signs on it, others lament for 'better days', etc. What if we simply can't maintain intact ecosystems because the planet is a wild fucking place and does whatever the fuck it does regardless of how hard we try to stop it? Hell it's worth a shot to try to some degree, but what if the solution is worse than no intentional action? That's the rub it seems to me, that every little thing people seem to do has unintended consequences, sometimes that aren't even seen for god knows how long after. When you're talking about "our environment", that's a risky game to go fucking with, even ifyou're pretty damned sure you can predict what will happen if you start fucking with it.

 

[superluminal]

Well, wes has it figured out so I guess we'll just see. And as for reading more into what someone says, well, wes would never do that.

Sorry if I offended anyone.

Bye.

 

[Tnerb]

I am visiting here so thought I would post,
I believe we need to keep a careful eye on whats happening. Taking action might not be right, that is until we know what we should do. You see that is simple but....
What do we need to do? Maybe we should find out what is causing problems and I think there's definitely some problems... Like the rainforests are dying right. And that's a concern. That's all I really advocate I feel. But over-population is also a concern for us, and taking away the oil is also very bad. Maybe we are growing up to destroying the planet. After all we are definitely living like hogs! That doesn't mean we are destroying it as far as I am seeing.

But I am probably wrong, but I mostly worry about over population, because the funny thing about that is that IS a problem!

 

[Roman]

What does that have to do with anything? You seem to insinuate that "people like me" desire that outcome. Please Roman, don't make me start thinking of "people like you" as if you should be categorized so distantly and generally. Honestly if I'm simply "people like me" to you, please put me on your goddamned ignore list. What a shitty thing to say.

Have you considered you might be reading more into what I've said than I actually said? "people like you" seem to do that.

I meant those who don't see the problem. In previous communications with you, you seemed to think that our wholesale destruction of the environment into useful things was us remaking our environment to benefit us. I find this a little bit of a loony concept, seeing as there isn't much evidence for it. Not any evidence that I've seen, anyway.

But there IS value on that, lots of it from lots of people. Some put dollar signs on it, others lament for 'better days', etc. What if we simply can't maintain intact ecosystems because the planet is a wild fucking place and does whatever the fuck it does regardless of how hard we try to stop it?

How is that "the planet" doing it? That's like shooting your horses and exclaiming "Jeeze, these are some wild and crazy horses! Look at them bleed to death! I had no idea!"

Fishing stock all over the world, for instance, are being totally depleted by people. Not whales or sharks or x-rays. Our fishing nets. It's a classic- the tragedy of the commons. A simple way to solve it, which has been done in several places, is to give fisherman ownership of the fish stock.

Hell it's worth a shot to try to some degree, but what if the solution is worse than no intentional action? That's the rub it seems to me, that every little thing people seem to do has unintended consequences, sometimes that aren't even seen for god knows how long after. When you're talking about "our environment", that's a risky game to go fucking with, even ifyou're pretty damned sure you can predict what will happen if you start fucking with it.

Oh, yeah, we're not going to be able to save every single golden amazonian tree frog or whatever. That's not what I'm worried about. The unfortunate problem with "people like me" is their near religious belief that the environment is full of intrinsic good and we have to pass lots of laws to protect it. Legislation very rarely provides good results.

As you say- we're not really sure what destroying the environment does. But simply because we're unsure what all the pieces do, doesn't mean that they don't do anything.