(Untitled)

[robotar]

the root of our problem of environmental degradation isn't a political, scientific, or economic issue; it is a cultural one. the schism between man and nature, the baconian method, cartesian philosophy, the abrahamic religions are the foundations upon which capitalism, nation-states, and industry are built. understanding this, i've come to build

Comments

[grolby]

I don't know if I buy this kind of theory. I think that it's too declarative - people are basically the same in underlying psychology, but that underlying psychology turns out very different people with very different needs. In any case, unless population levels fall dramatically, urban living is essential to the preservation of the planet. We need to do it better, of course.

The question about control and why it tends to rest with few instead of many is a good one, and one that anthropologists and sociologists would love to figure out. I disagree with the contention that specialized knowledge or training is not necessary to understand and address these questions - our gut feelings or intuitions about why things work the way they do, how the universe functions, even how people think, have proven over the millennia to be basically useless. The best answers we've ever had have come by the use of the scientific method. When used, the method works. When ignored, or when parts of it are skipped for the sake of convenience or ideology, it fails. The apparently widespread belief among radicals who want to save the world from the ravages of pollution, tyranny and environmental structure that Science (it gets capitalized, for some reason) is part of the amorphous Enemy - along with Capitalism, Hierarchy, the State - is appalling short-sighted. It frightens me, frankly.

Science is not an institution, it's a method. Because it's a method, it can be used by good people, by bad people, and by normal people (who have a confusing mix of good and bad tendencies, tied up in and defined by their even more confusing mix of values). Science is a reliable way to get facts about the world. When combined with values that emphasize freedom, human well-being and environmental robustness, it yields results that, in my opinion, are mostly beneficial. On balance, I actually do think that science has mostly improved life in the industrialized world. Religious ignorance is on the retreat because there is no scientifically-generated data to back up religious claims. No amount of free-form theorizing will have that effect.

The world is complicated and doesn't really break up into good and bad people, institutions or ideas very easily. Science is part of that world. So is capitalism, states, etc. My ideas about how things should work are pretty liberal, but I am dismayed by the taking of ideological sides. Capitalism, especially free-market capitalism, is not a complete ideology. Neither is Marxism or Post-Structuralism. None of them do well on their own.