Rethious t1_j2tcuhc wrote
Reply to comment by monkeylogic42 in Look on the dark side | We must keep the flame of pessimism burning: it is a virtue for our deeply troubled times, when crude optimism is a vice by ADefiniteDescription
Of course. But there’s no circumstance that could make striving to make tomorrow better than today not worthwhile. Regardless of what’s ahead, throwing up our hands benefits no one.
monkeylogic42 t1_j2tef23 wrote
I didn't say throw up your hands, I just said the world isn't going to get it's shit together to avoid the disastrous future that optimists tried to steer us from gently for the last 75 years. Everyone would need to cut most of their fossil fuel usage and plastics about 40 years ago. Since then it's been an exceleration with capitalists on the side dumping money in to 'optimism' for the masses so they can keep profiting. It's just like anytime someone tries to remind everyone we don't have free energy and carbon capture isn't going to save us in time, they get shouted down for being a buzzkill. Like the the global warming episode of always sunny- I don't want just one shot, I want seven! I don't wanna stop! I don't wanna slow down! The world is programmed by consumption and there are too many people. Look up the difference between a million seconds and a billion.
Rethious t1_j2ti12g wrote
Carbon capture and free energy won’t save us, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be invested in. It’s a fine line in that they’re both essential and deserve heavy investment, but shouldn’t be used as an excuse to neglect conservation efforts.
Optimism doesn’t mean being in denial about the challenges we face.
monkeylogic42 t1_j2tkv7t wrote
Where are the conservation efforts? There are so little it may as well be 0. As far as what optimism means, it kind of is denial:
op·ti·mism /ˈäptəˌmiz(ə)m/ noun 1. hopefulness and confidence about the future or the successful outcome of something.
PHILOSOPHY the doctrine, especially as set forth by Leibniz, that this world is the best of all possible worlds.
If we stopped all unnecessary consumption today and all efforts went to remediation of the damage already done, it still won't be enough to fix the world. We have finite resources and there isn't a global will to do anything differently. We've blown past every warning light and marker with thoughts and prayers.
Rethious t1_j2tmlfc wrote
>There mat be so little it may well be 0.
I’m sorry, but that’s a fundamentally unserious view.
monkeylogic42 t1_j2tngks wrote
How much of the rainforest is destroyed per day? Wetlands? How many wells of oil still spewing how much in to the environment? How many forever chemicals spills have been remedied? The ramifications of our actions have only begun, and the actions haven't stopped. None the less the underdeveloped areas that don't even have a clue or care to tally pollution accurately.
goes231even t1_j2uwec0 wrote
What is unserious is believing the fairytale that says any of our meager efforts toward conservation are making even the slightest dent in the problem as the rate of the destruction that got us here in the first place is not only not slowing down but is actually increasing.
Any efforts toward saving the environment are essentially a capitalistic dog and pony show at this point and has even reached the mainstream news outlets.
Rethious t1_j2vad9c wrote
This is the exact type of pessimistic fatalism that is antithetical to actually accomplishing anything.
yassenof t1_j2v2628 wrote
You're using some overly strong hyperbole here, and it undermines your point.
monkeylogic42 t1_j2v5gue wrote
Where, pray tell, is the hyperbole? Are you sure you're not just the one with their head in the sand??
yassenof t1_j2wouwq wrote
The numbers you used for your years. And yes I'm sure.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments