Maybe freedom is not anarchy, because using freedom in ways that destroys later freedom is not self-consistent.
Maybe the Catholic Church’s definition of freedom might be slightly better: (clipped from a web blog):
" … many respected Catholic apologists define freedom not as the ability to d whatever one wants in life (whih is how most would define it), but rather as the ability to do what one ought to do. True freedom removes the roadblocks to doing good, and thus the person is free to do what he should."
In other words, freedom consists in having a pleurality of right paths open.
Apologies, insufficient references.
- There is a war in the ocean between pelagic fish and jellyfish. Jellyfish eat juvenile pelagic fish and adult fish eat jellyfish. (Moon fish, turtles). Increasing the acidity tilts the balance in favour of the jellyfish. Jellyfish require greater culinary skill to prepare for the banquet..
- A small reservoir of some threatened species surviving in a special environment is all that is necessary to re-seed the planet, weakening the position that acidification could not have occurred otherwise calcareous organisms would not have survived.
- Is it possible to identify a Point of Inflection in the population growth curves? Max Roser has it peaking in about 50 years.I think that he has not given enough weight to the effects of environmental pollution on fecundity. (See my reference above).
- Would it not be in our interest to question the value of the Calvinistic virtue of Industry? I think that our survival would be aided by elevating Idleness. After all, bears hibernate in times of scarcity. Mental effort could Substitute for much physical effort for those unable to escape the iron grip of their "genes" (morphic fields.) After all if you are in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.
i guess that depends on how one would define the word "problem". if bacteria in a petri dish are growing exponentially until food supply is exhausted and then they rapidly collapse in number, is that a problem? or is that merely the self correcting function of nature?
are we any different from those bacteria?
what do you mean by using freedom in ways that destroys later freedom - can you give an example?
it sounds like perhaps what you might be referring to, is one making poor choices that reduce one's options later on…but this is just a guess. if that's indeed what you mean, then the obvious solution is, don't make poor choices. and making that choice voluntarily is highly preferable to having a man pointing a gun at one's head, saying, "don't choose option B".
the word "anarchy" comes from the greek anarkhos: an- ‘without’ + arkhos ‘ruler.’
anarchy merely means that one is not ruled over by others.
in my personal experience, anarchists are those who have a great deal of respect for their fellow man, and follow the NAP (non-aggression principle).
freedom consists in having all paths open.
wisdom consists in choosing what is the right path for oneself, consistent with one's conscience, knowledge, and belief system.
quite true, les. that's why libertarianism/minarchism, as well-intentioned as it is, is a mistake. saying you strive for small government is like saying you want just a little bit of cancer. cancer, by its nature, spreads to consume and destroy its host, just like government does over time. the only solution is to cut it out entirely.
i don't need any political system at all. if you feel that you need some sort of political system, by all means, go ahead. just don't impose it on other people who don't want to be involved with it.
that's a great point, les.
i agree with you that this person's actions are pretty outrageous.
now, as far as this "system" they are manipulating - what do you suppose it consists of? while i'm not familiar with the individuals in question, i would suspect that it may be welfare handouts by the government which subsidizes people to have copious amounts of children. it's odd that you would point to too much liberty as being the culprit here. it is likely, in fact, the opposite of liberty - government - that is the culprit; it frequently acts in ways that creates perverse incentives for people, and destroys any personal responsibility or consequences for one's actions.
That may be correct. I used to work in aquariums (well I still do) and one job I had was to build the life support system for a 15,000 litre live coral tank. At the heart of the system was a calcium reactor which injected pure CO2 into a limestone chamber to lower the pH and dissolve the limestone and replace the calcium carbonate which the corals were removing via their growth. So in this case we were directly injecting CO2 at rates far higher than today's anthropogenic environmental contributions. The pH coming out of this unit was around 6 or something I believe, and at night when photosynthesis was off the overall tank pH dropped to 7.8. So I do not believe that pH itself is really very important in determining shellfish's ability to build skeletons, what is more important is carbonate hardness. Alongside this lower pH the water had a higher carbonate hardness, which was the whole point of the calcium reactor. So, as you say, maybe the problem out in the real environment is that the change may be too fast and carbonate hardness may not have enough time to find a balance with CO2.
This Catholic Church you speak of is no arbitrator of truth.
This Catholic Church has been the source of more suffering and pain amongst human beings than almost any other entity in existence. Many wars included.
Please quote another less reprehensible source for your findings.
Great discussion everyone. Arthur this is along the lines of your comment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67bC15PBt64&app=desktop
Has this topic been discussed here? I do find it interesting that during this podcast the industrial cattle industry wasn't brought up. It seems that the amount of environmental destruction that goes into factory farm beef plays a big role in this discussion. I really liked this documentary but don't necessarily agree with what they propose. I resonate with what Joel Salatin describes as carbon sequestration fertilization. http://www.cowspiracy.com/facts/
Get popcorn, beverage go to the loo, settle down for good information.
Many points for discussion.
And hope.
That is a powerful presentation. I have never seen anyone tie together our scientific, spiritual, intellectual and ethical worlds into such a coherent call to guide our quest for leaving the planet liveable not only physically but also in the sense of evolving toward a higher level of awareness.
Concur - very interesting and hopeful discussion and topic.
I can see it now. "Hi, I'm the Pope, leader of the Catholic Church. Yes, the bodily ascension, Holy Crucade, Galileo house arrest, inquisition, subjugation of women, pedifile priest, Catholic Church. Let's all get together and sit on pillows and chant and center ourselves and balance our chakras and visualize world peace and commune with aliens through The Force (turns out the UFO crash sites in the desert are real and the Air Force was lying to us the whole time, go figger). No, seriously".
Oops, sorry. Being a nasty, cynical, doomer asshole again. OK, check, center, breath, ooooommmm, Hail Mary (Mother Gaia), full of grace… Dig it, back on track.
If the universe is as full of life as top soil is with bacteria (which seems likely) and intelligent extra terrestrial beings are aware of us (possible) and they've been in contact with us (seems unlikely), why the big hush hush? Given the amount of speculation about the possible ramifications of extra terrestrial contact over the past century or so I think that if the POTUS announced that he'd been in touch with the United Federation of Planets and that they were worried that we were on a trajectory for self termination and wondered if we needed a hand getting our sh*t together, few people would bat an eye. I can see were the Pope announcing that aliens had told him that the only hope for humanity was the immediate over through if the Military Industrial Complex might cause a ruckus.
I wonder if the Church can buy the Rainbow Family franchise. It seems that they've been on the right track for some time and it would save a lot of rebranding.
John G.
The salient point amongst many that I got out of the lecture John, is that human philosophy is in transition.
Scientific Realism was a reaction to Religious Dogmatism. Religious dogmatism has always been a tool of state. (Historical note: Constantine dictated the simplification of the Church at the council of Nicosia, AD 200)
Quantum Physics, an unwanted child of Scientific Realism has driven a wooden stake through the heart of its parent.
Pointing out the many salacious tales of the Church is an entertainment that I enjoy with my friends. Believe me they can throw a wild party. But I digress.
Scientific Realism has devolved into protecting itself with Dogmatisms of its own, hence the tale of the scientist turning his back on looking at the UFO that his peers were peering at. "It is not in my Model of reality, therefore I will ignore it." This is the psychological malady that Dr Iain McGilchrist says is endemic.
That Complexity is a result of Entropy, and is an emergent property means that we will inevitability evolve. We are evolving in this Crisis.This, I believe is the nub of your discomfort.
I know that it is the nub of mine.
Those whom the gods would destroy or create, they first make mad.Horrobin, The Madness of Adam and Eve.
Thanks InfiniteSelf for sharing that lecture. It too gave me many things to consider more deeply. One of my immediate take aways of it is the need for us as a culture to come to a new understanding of the world that incorporates many of the disparate subjects Mr. Sheehan talks about. It's something I've been working on for myself for decades now.
It also brings to mind the topic that has been coming up here on PeakProsperity of the need to develop new stories or narratives. There seems to be a growing recognition that the old ones are breaking down and failing to offer the effective guidance they once did.