It occurs to me that the consensus trance is - perhaps - the Backfire effect meets herding behavior.
My guess: evolutionary biology has constructed the backfire effect to make sure that hard-won life lessons are never relinquished, while - again presumably - the herd comes up with better decisions in aggregate than individuals, at least most of the time. [In trading, the saying is: “the herd is right about the trend, but wrong at both ends”]. I suspect both of these behaviors are usually pro-survival. We may bemoan the lack of flexibility that the backfire effect brings, but - how much disaster would we encounter if we all simply ditched our hard-won life lessons at the first challenge?
I would guess that evolution tried all sorts of approaches long ago, and found it led to poor outcomes.
Perhaps chalk it up to being heavily influenced by our biology?
“Teenagers don’t think about the long-term consequences of their actions.” First, some do. Some do, some of the time. Most do, occasionally. Second, most humans aren’t good at long-term thinking. As primates, long-term thinking would not have served us as well as short and medium-term thinking/planning.
“Teenagers are lazy.” Um…no biological entity will expend more energy than it needs to expend in order to get the energy it needs. Monkeys don’t climb to the top of a tree to get fruit if there is fruit on the lower branches, unless there is a predator down there. The teenagers who do expend more energy than they need to get good grades, for instance, perceive that is what is needed for their long-term success…and they usually are the ones who buck the biology and actually do think long-term. Humans are lazy, as is any organism if it can afford to be.
In all seriousness - this whole post is tongue-in-cheek- I think that we often don’t take biology and psychology into account when considering lots of things. Economists who base their economic models on the assumption that people will act rationally, for instance, clearly don’t know much about human psychology.
Great conversation in this thread by the way. A fine example of why I always come back to PP.
Great idea. There is a lot of talk about emotional resiliency and developing connections to your local community to create community resilience. I don’t know how you qualify/quantify that to raise it to a 4th E, but certainly the cultural vessel in which this all occurs can be as important as all the other E’s. And certainly the integrity of relationships between the three E’s is critical to our ability to think wholistically about problems and avoid the “silver bullet” syndrome. Certainly no single issue, like a gold standard, as much I support the idea will solve all our problems, (or even go a long way to solving all our problems).
Regardless of the economic or political construct the we are placed in, if we collectively don’t reach a minimal level of enlightenment, all is for nought.
I love this conversation! Thank you.
I propose Escapism as the fourth E. Merriam Webster defines escapism as
Habitual diversion of the mind to purely imaginative activity or entertainment as an escape from reality or routineOh, the directions we can go with this definition. "Imaginative activity," besides encompassing all the truly mind numbing nonsense that is called entertainment these days, also includes believing business as usual can continue without consequence.
Without your consent.
I wanted to post this talk here to get this info in front of Chris, Charles and everyone else.
His book is also worth the read.
https://www.facebook.com/Flowgenome/videos/1724405300935816/
The talk is titled Manufacturing dissent: Cognitive Liberty in the Age of the Algorithm
Author - Jamie Wheel from the Flow Genome Project. Book is Stealing Fire.
Great writeup and discussion. I just wanted to discuss some current events from my area since it is relevant to the worms uprising. For a long time Alberta has been pushing for another pipeline to the BC Coast to increase oil sands crude export. Kinder Morgan already has a small pipeline out here but it constrains supply. From what I understand most of the other pipeline projects from Alberta have been squashed as well. Alberta really wants access to global oil markets.
Enbridge proposed the Northern Gateway pipeline several years ago which was heavily opposed and it died. Kinder Morgan has proposed the twinning of its existing pipeline to increase throughput to Burnaby. This would follow the existing pipeline but in many sections would take a new route. I think it would result in a 10 fold increase in tanker traffic through Vancouver Harbour.
There has been a lot of resistance in BC to this pipeline for several reasons. The National Energy Board which was basically shaped by the previous Conservative federal government was / is stacked with pro-pipeline sympathizers and the review process was criticized for being a sham from the beginning, and from what I have learned about it, it indeed was.
The federal government approved the pipeline and has been trying to convince BC that it should be built and legally, it now has the green light. But BC Premier Horgan has come out against the pipeline and has vowed to stop it, largely a political move to not completely alienate the environmental contingent after he approved the Site C dam (a terrible legacy of the previous “Liberal” government which was actually made up of Conservatives). Alberta has responded with a boycott of BC wines.
The problem is that the pipeline does not have the support of aboriginals whose land it would be passing through. The federal government made a mistake by rubber stamping it because they tried to ram it through. This has created huge resentment and resistance here. Hundreds of people have already been arrested as construction is starting at the port and it hasn’t actually gone through any native land yet (although many would argue that Burnaby is still native land).
The spill response plans have been criticized as being inadequate, and I would agree. I don’t think they haven’t done a real investigation into what would happen, and for good reason: if they did, they would have to admit that the stuff sinks and they just don’t know how to clean it up. The predictable response from the oil industry is to assure us all that marine safety will be top priority. But this, coming from Kinder Morgan, which is run by the same guy who did the Enron scam, doesn’t hold much weight. Especially in light of all the ongoing oil spills all over the world despite the industry’s continuing assurances that it is safe. People just don’t believe them.
In the last couple of days, Kinder Morgan has put the project on suspension for a couple months until more certainty can be achieved. It looks like this project may possibly end up being canceled. I find this interesting because the worms are rising up. The people are opposing the multinational plans to do whatever they want with our environment. But this will create a lot of internal resentment within Canada, either way this project goes. Alberta sees it as their right to force a pipeline onto BC which BC doesn’t want, and our only “payment” for this would be greater federal tax revenues and job opportunities for BC’ers who want to go work in Alberta. Alberta sees it as unfair that BC is sabotaging their economic plans.
The Feds and Alberta keep arguing that this pipeline is essential for Canada’s economic well-being – further proof that they don’t understand the 3 E’s and the folly of exponential growth. They don’t understand how to handle unemployment in Alberta when the economy stops growing. They don’t know how to manage an economy that isn’t growing. They have no idea what will happen when the oil runs out – that will be some future generation’s responsibility to sort out. Or Treknology will sort it out by then.
It seems Canada is dealing with so many of the issues that all former oil exporters have dealt with. I just wish this project had been handled properly and fairly from the beginning so that it would have never gotten to this stage under false pretenses. On one hand, I understand the argument for giving the world’s largest remaining oil reserves access to world markets, but on the other hand it was forced on the people illegitimately. Due process was not followed. If it had been, then we would have never gotten to this stage where there is so much antagonism because all parties were not properly considered and included.
Alberta says if the pipeline doesn’t go through, the crude will be shipped out by train which has a greater likelihood of spills.
There was a moment in the movie Independence Day (you know, the crappy sci-fi film back in the 90s) when the American President was yelling at the aliens because they had come to earth to essentially rape, pillage, and strip it of its resources before moving on to another planet. I remember thinking back then, “Ironic. We’re pissed because the aliens are just better and more efficient at it than we are.”
We are the toxic algae bloom, but the nice thing is that the laws of nature still rule here. We too shall have our reckoning and be brought back down to manageable numbers.
Double post blues.
/sighs
Um…
/smacks head and points at his crappy modem
“Whether we and our politicians know it or not, Nature is party to all our deals and decisions, and she has more votes, a longer memory, and a sterner sense of justice than we do.” - Wendell Berry
I’ve been very busy with family events, and now again with work, but there’s been time to peek in here. Love the E ideas, many of which helped me understand more of my own tentative thinking. (And also the summary of the situation here in BC with the pipelines.)
Wrestling with the possible 4th E:
-What do the other 3 Es have in common? Chris calls them a lens. They comprise globally-scaled systems which carry our civilization, and are nevertheless strongly limiting, to the point of catastrophic impact.
-It is continuously bumping into some other as yet undefined limiting effect that makes me suspect the existence of another E.
-I know PPers depend on evidence to back thinking, and that usually means data, scientific studies or reports from credible sources. My source is extensive personal experience of human community and personal growth practices, which doesn’t quite fit in here. Be that as it may, I do know from that experience that a well-supported and even partially-healed human can embody remarkably insightful intelligence, deep presence and real power in the world.
-Coming from that background, I’ve accepted that human effectiveness is not only a function of our intellectual ability. Our emotional selves have the whip hand, even if we “successfully” suppress them. I assert that our top quality intellectual activity rides the deep insights provided by digestion of emotional reactions. THERE we are connected to our values, passions, loves and responsibilities, and there we can see much more context for our Earth experience. We just can’t think well, feel deeply, have insight, recognize consequences, be steadfast, or even enjoy Earth life much if we are carrying around a confusion of undigested pain experiences. And our intellects, though fabulous, can get horribly lost when we are in pain.
-A 4th E, for me, then, and apparently for some of you too based on your E words, has something to do not with the world or systems out there in the world, but with the inner world of human limitation/capacity: deadly stupid when in a mess, powerful and brilliant when supported and awake.
I hate to send this in half-digested, but there will be no more time to work on it for awhile. Thanks to all for your great input on such an interesting conversation. I don’t seriously propose that we need to change the 3 Es, but it does provoke good thinking!
would be transformative. It would take the message of this site from an analysis and critique of the current state of affairs allowing us to prepare for what has a high probability of occurring as individuals to one that seeks to create a new narrative. In a sense this site fractured the discussion by creating the Resilient Life section, where the mundane details of what variety of tomatoes to plant or how to raise chickens is discussed. How do we let that thought process inform the discussion at a higher level the rest of the site. As David Korten said, if you want to change the future, change the narrative.
Crafting a new vision is no mean feat. As was suggested early on by MM, left brain, meet your other (and better) half please, mister right brain. Are we ready for this? The amazing abundance of natural systems is created by all the participants giving back more than they take. Yet it seems to be the imperative of our current system is - take, take and take some more, only the weak and the stupid give back. Isn’t the mantra even hear, preserve your wealth, keep your hands tightly grasped. And yet the natural systems continue to give, and they will let us destroy them, if we will let ourselves do just that.
Imagine if those digital dollars that flew around were forced to be visualized in say equivalent energy values, say cords of wood, barrels of oil, physical human labor, harvested crops, etc. Could we continue to do what we do. Could we continue on as the walking dead. We are trading life for digits on a computer screen.
Hi Treebeard,
I love your idea that the fourth E should be something positive. How about Emergence? There are so many levels to emergence in this conversation, both internal and external. Typically, when we increase our awareness about anything, something which this community fosters, we emerge into a new of seeing and relating to ourselves, loved ones, community and the larger world. What will emergence out of the perpetual growth meme look like?
–Suzie
Suzie, that is a powerful 4th E–emergence, as its core is the recognition of the need for emergent systems/narratives which includes what we’re all talking about, bottoms-up, self-organizing, decentralized ways of living as opposed to top-down hierarchies imposed to keep the status quo glued together a bit longer. I vote for emergence.
Emergence
I wrote this a couple of years ago but I still like the idea of “Ethics”. Ethics should be based on facts and results. We can agree on ethics no matter what our religion or spiritual leanings. They should be overriding principles which if followed would solve the issues of disconnection we are having today. The 3 ethics of permaculture for example are care of earth, care of people and share the surplus. Those are a good starting point. I would like to have all people on the planet adopt an ethic that says the entire geological/biological world is a singular system which no entity has the right to damage. Damaging that system is a crime. I like the word “emergence” but I don’t think others will know what it refers to without explanation. Ethics is straightforward - given the actual realities of the energy, environment, and economic systems - we should proceed and take actions based on the ethical principles which apply to today. “All men are created equal” has become problematic to say the least. The new ethic might be “All creatures great and small and the natural earth they live on should be preserved”.