Dear Guy, Kevin Hester shared your post, and the following is from my reply to him. I appreciate your comment here on miracles. The old essay you cite by David Hume has long been among my favourites, as a classic of scientific enlightenment, due to its emphasis on the consistency of the laws of physics as a fundamental axiom of sound thought. Hume says miracle stories can have three possible explanations. They are either the result of error, or of deception, or of inconsistency in the laws of physics. The first two are vastly more likely than the third, leading to Hume's point that you endorse, that miracles are impossible. We can never rule out error or deception in miraculous claims, whereas we are justified in excluding claims of unique unprovable circumstances that are never seen in normal experience.
This theme of consistency relates to Kevin's point, in that sustainability is not consistent with unsustainability. Logically, a statement cannot be true and false. That may seem a mere pedantic point of grammar, but it opens the important observation that if something is not sustainable it will stop. Much popular advertising uses sustainable in a different sense, of meeting emotional beliefs about environment.
My view is that human civilization is sustainable, but only through a significant paradigm shift, firstly using solar geoengineering to prevent climate collapse, secondly using marine permaculture to engage the vast energy, resources and area of the world ocean, and thirdly considering the questions of spiritual philosophy about what it means to think globally.
Thank you for your insightful comment, Robert. Thanks, too, to Kevin.
I’m dreaming for a sustainable civilization. Unfortunately, the never-ending demands for more and faster within this set of living arrangements keep interfering with a more reasonable and pragmatic system that would address needs rather than desires.
Thinking globally while acting locally is a great idea, as you suggest. Can we take such actions, or will our desires continue to lead us astray?
Hello again Guy. Your reply prompts me to reflect on Christianity. Of course, the mainstream faith tradition is deeply corrupt and evil in its placement of supernatural miraculous fantasy in place of scientific observation of reality, allowing humanity to hurtle on our heedless trajectory toward extinction and collapse. And yet, as noted in your plea for a more reasonable and pragmatic system that would address needs rather than desires, it is possible to find support for this simpler and more rational ethic within Christian theology, in ways that are compatible with the atheism of David Hume. Notably, the Beatitudes see the blessing of God for the poor in spirit, saying theirs is the kingdom of heaven, not as a supernatural afterlife, but as a sustainable ethic of simplicity. Next, Jesus says those who mourn will be comforted, suggesting a possible pathway out of climate collapse. His famous line that the meek will inherit the earth directly supports your arguments about the dangerous arrogance and foolishness of our dominant imperial consumer culture. This analysis can be extended with the remaining Beatitudes.
Religious fantasies are a coping mechanism for some people because life IS a sorrid mess. This also connects to stoic think. Don't waste the little time we have trying to change the unchangable.
Well said, Craig … er, well written! I work every day to avoid changing the unchangeable. And yet, here I am, pleading with the disinterested masses to accept abrupt, irreversible climate change. Perhaps I’ll learn … one of these days!
As I watch the "Great Unravelling" gaining pace, I see more and more people searching for a silver bullet, that will make the unsustainable, sustainable!
Um, hello?
Whatever TF is coming, some of us still have these moments that we can cherish and enjoy!
There has never been a more important time in history to "Take a Walk on the Wildside" while we still can!
Dear Guy, Kevin Hester shared your post, and the following is from my reply to him. I appreciate your comment here on miracles. The old essay you cite by David Hume has long been among my favourites, as a classic of scientific enlightenment, due to its emphasis on the consistency of the laws of physics as a fundamental axiom of sound thought. Hume says miracle stories can have three possible explanations. They are either the result of error, or of deception, or of inconsistency in the laws of physics. The first two are vastly more likely than the third, leading to Hume's point that you endorse, that miracles are impossible. We can never rule out error or deception in miraculous claims, whereas we are justified in excluding claims of unique unprovable circumstances that are never seen in normal experience.
This theme of consistency relates to Kevin's point, in that sustainability is not consistent with unsustainability. Logically, a statement cannot be true and false. That may seem a mere pedantic point of grammar, but it opens the important observation that if something is not sustainable it will stop. Much popular advertising uses sustainable in a different sense, of meeting emotional beliefs about environment.
My view is that human civilization is sustainable, but only through a significant paradigm shift, firstly using solar geoengineering to prevent climate collapse, secondly using marine permaculture to engage the vast energy, resources and area of the world ocean, and thirdly considering the questions of spiritual philosophy about what it means to think globally.
Thank you for your work.
Thank you for your insightful comment, Robert. Thanks, too, to Kevin.
I’m dreaming for a sustainable civilization. Unfortunately, the never-ending demands for more and faster within this set of living arrangements keep interfering with a more reasonable and pragmatic system that would address needs rather than desires.
Thinking globally while acting locally is a great idea, as you suggest. Can we take such actions, or will our desires continue to lead us astray?
Hello again Guy. Your reply prompts me to reflect on Christianity. Of course, the mainstream faith tradition is deeply corrupt and evil in its placement of supernatural miraculous fantasy in place of scientific observation of reality, allowing humanity to hurtle on our heedless trajectory toward extinction and collapse. And yet, as noted in your plea for a more reasonable and pragmatic system that would address needs rather than desires, it is possible to find support for this simpler and more rational ethic within Christian theology, in ways that are compatible with the atheism of David Hume. Notably, the Beatitudes see the blessing of God for the poor in spirit, saying theirs is the kingdom of heaven, not as a supernatural afterlife, but as a sustainable ethic of simplicity. Next, Jesus says those who mourn will be comforted, suggesting a possible pathway out of climate collapse. His famous line that the meek will inherit the earth directly supports your arguments about the dangerous arrogance and foolishness of our dominant imperial consumer culture. This analysis can be extended with the remaining Beatitudes.
Religious fantasies are a coping mechanism for some people because life IS a sorrid mess. This also connects to stoic think. Don't waste the little time we have trying to change the unchangable.
Well said, Craig … er, well written! I work every day to avoid changing the unchangeable. And yet, here I am, pleading with the disinterested masses to accept abrupt, irreversible climate change. Perhaps I’ll learn … one of these days!
As I watch the "Great Unravelling" gaining pace, I see more and more people searching for a silver bullet, that will make the unsustainable, sustainable!
Um, hello?
Whatever TF is coming, some of us still have these moments that we can cherish and enjoy!
There has never been a more important time in history to "Take a Walk on the Wildside" while we still can!
https://guymcpherson.com/science-update-how-nature-nurtures/
An old phrase comes to mind, Kevin: Desperate times call for desperate measures. These are, indeed, trying times … and even desperate, for some.
We were never guaranteed another day. As you write, “moments we can cherish and enjoy” are the most—and the best— we’ve ever had.
Thank you for your insightful comment. Thank you, too, for restacking my post.