How should we react to climate change, with Pessimism or Optimism?

Deleted User

READ COMMENTS BEFORE VOTING: Following a discussion on Utilising technologies designed for Mars as a backup plan for preparing humanity to weather climate change here on Earth, it appeared a deeper question came up.

How should we react to this existential threat? With Pessimism or Optimism? Will how we choose to face the challenge factor into our chances of meeting it?

At the moment, despite reality painting a very dim outlook I’ve been choosing to be optimistic that we will find a way and I haven’t given up hope. Is it the biggest challenged we’ve faced as a species? Probably. However, weren’t all the previous challenges we’ve made it through as a species described as impossible by many? I look around me and see many items we take for granted, that not so long ago would be described as magic to our ancestors. Water comes to my beck and call whenever I want, I can summon fire in less than a second, I can communicate with multiple people instantly, I can see the faces of people on the other side of the globe in real time, I can make voices and music fill my home without opening my mouth or touching an instrument, I have access to what used to be only a mere fantasy with plenty of food at hand. These are barely a handful of the other things I could describe in this fashion.

At the moment, it’s extremely hard to get a true gauge of what our chances really are. Political priorities of world governments don’t seem to be matching up with the priorities that are required for long term survival and actually seem to be going the wrong direction entirely as we see the rise of radical tyrannical groups gaining power in many places around the world from the USA, Brazil, India, Philippines to name a few.

Our resources aren’t being put towards the problem adequately either with military spending still making up the bulk of government investment which in turn feeds the fossil fuel industry causing our existential threat in the first place. It’s almost crazy to think, that this investment might kill us all without any nuclear device ever being detonated and a massive stockpile of death machines lie unused yet successful in their ultimate purpose.

I have more thoughts I could share but I feel I’m rambling and it would be better to get this debate going as I feel debate leads to the real arguments which help us determine how we should really feel.

https://time.com/5709100/halt-climate-change-300-billion/ Is this enough to be optimistic about? A 20 year stay?

How should a Pragmatist resolve this?

Janus

With realism.

180 Proof

'Pessimism or optimism' for whom? for what? time horizon? :chin:

Pfhorrest

With pragmatism: acting as though success is possible but not guaranteed, as only in that condition is there reason to try, and only if we try is success possible (though still not guaranteed).

Same attitude we should take toward everything.

Deleted User

↪Pfhorrest

But which of the two is more pragmatic? Is believing there is a way with optimism better than disbelieving there is a way with Pessimism?

I’m a pragmatist by philosophy so I’m already responding with pragmatism.

Which is the better motivator to actually act and contribute toward the problem within your area of it? For example, if I was pessimistic, would I have bothered to post and ask the question?

Think of the problem as if it were a referendum where we actually have the ability to vote on whether or not climate change even happens. Answering with Optimism is voting for it not to happen and Pessimism is voting for it to happen. What happens if too many people vote Pessimism and what happens if enough people vote Optimism? That’s not to say outlook is the only factor here, but is it a contributing factor?

Deleted User

↪Janus

What does realism say in your perspective?

Deleted User

↪180 Proof

For Pragmatism. Which is more likely to increase our chances of weathering climate change? Optimism or Pessimism?

Deleted User

Another argument for optimism.

The butterfly effect argument:
We believe that making even a small change in the past, would drastically alter the present. So is the Optimism butterfly the one we should be collectively stepping on? Doesn’t it also follow that if a small change to the past will drastically alter the present, then a small change in the present can drastically alter the future?

Banno

Adults keep saying we owe it to the young people to give them hope. But I don't want your hope, I don't want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic, I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act, I want you to act as if you would in a crisis. I want you to act as if the house was on fire, because it is.

Hence, pessimism.

180 Proof

Which is more likely to increase our chances of weathering climate change? Optimism or Pessimism? — Mark Dennis

For whom/what? Time-horizon? :brow:

Deleted User

↪180 Proof

About our chances of making safe our biosphere for us and as much within it as we can within the next 50 years. Should we as individuals be optimistic? Not really sure what else I can say to make myself clearer at the moment it’s late haha

Deleted User

@jellyfish @Pantagruel @Artemis @Terrapin Station Want to weigh in on this? :)

Pfhorrest

↪Mark Dennis

As I elaborated immediately already, I take a pragmatist approach to mean that there is a POSSIBLE way but not a GUARANTEED way, in contrast to the excessive optimism of thinking there is a guaranteed way or the excessive pessimism of thinking there is no possible way. There might or might not be a way, so we must try for the best and neither give up nor rest assured, as either of those leads to inaction and so guaranteed failure.

BC

↪Mark Dennis

A realistic assessment of the global warming crisis ought to result in feelings ranging from pessimism to despair, with a side trip to include rage.

Do not make the mistake of thinking you are personally responsible. If you are not a high level national decision maker; if you are not a coal/oil/gas CEO or member of any of several coal/oil/gas boards of directors; if you are not a CEO of an auto maker; if you are not a major stockholder in any of these industries--then you are not in a position to make critical decisions.

Those who are in positions where they could make critical decisions have, by and large, decided to burn the last ton of coal, the last barrel of petroleum, and the last cubic foot of gas. That is why I am fairly certain that we will collectively suffer a hot wet death.

We are running out of time (or we have run out of time--not sure which) for our usual slow rate of change to make a difference in the outcome. What we are doing now (putting in modest wind and solar farms) we should have been doing 40 years ago. Jimmy Carter put a solar panel on the White House roof in 1976. Ronald Reagan took it down in 1980. End of discussion. We should have started worrying about temperate and tropical rain forests 40 years ago. We didn't.

A hand full of ultra-rich and power people in the world are both guilty and responsible for the critical problems we face.

BC

Is it the biggest challenged we’ve faced as a species? — Mark Dennis

It might be, but you know, the bubonic plague wiped out at least a third of Europe's population in a short period of time. The plague was horrible, but once it let up, the survivors picked up where they left off and carried on. A lot of people found they were better off than before the plague because they had inherited bits of property that the dead had left them. The economy boomed.

I don't cite the plague as evidence that all will be well. I cite it as evidence that abandoning coal/oil/gas, and the private auto would be a horrible experience (it really would be) but that many people would survive. Walking or riding a bike to work, taking a bus, literally running to the store for bread, forgoing many of the luxuries that have become necessities (like fresh strawberries all year round, organic air-cooled-chicken, or flying 10,000 miles to attend a wedding) would be hard, but people would learn to make do. It would be easier than recovering from bubonic plague.

BC

BECAUSE

Political priorities of world governments don’t seem to be matching up with the priorities that are required for long term survival — Mark Dennis

IT ISN'T

... extremely hard to get a true gauge of what our chances really are — Mark Dennis

It's really very simple: IF political [and economic] priorities don't match up with long term survival requirements

THEN

we won't survive.

We're screwed. The world will become our rotisserie.

BC

But which of the two is more pragmatic? Is believing there is a way with optimism better than disbelieving there is a way with Pessimism? — Mark Dennis

Optimism and pessimism have nothing to do with pragmatism. Optimism and pessimism are emotional states. Neither are a solution to anything.

Deleted User

The real question is if anyone here at all, is doing anything combat it. I just found out a few weeks ago you can't even recycle pizza boxes. So, yep, I'm feeling pessi.

I do agree somewhat the realism approach. Realistic evaluation will naturally lead you to the answer of this.

Deleted User

↪Bitter Crank

Yum, fried humans. :ok:

BC

↪Swan

More like rotisserie chicken, I would think.

Metaphyzik

We don’t want to combat it. If we did it would be obvious.

We are not capable of altering our behaviour. We are captivated by the new, the interesting, the existential experience so to speak. We are explorers, innovators, creators, and when we are doing those things is when we as a species advances and shines. As individuals when we feel most alive. We cannot change.

The only way to deal with it is to create a cost effective way to reverse the damage we have done, are doing, and will do. Scrub carbon from the oceans and atmosphere. Remove toxins. Remove food sources that are compromised, or mitigate the problems. Basically we have to win the race, but we are not capable of stopping or reversing course.

Economically at some point it will make sense to put vast resources into the problem. But not now because the problems aren’t costing money. When they do then the calculation is that at some point solving the problem will save money. Or make money, if u will.... that is when things will start to happen. Not before.

The social protest is but a mere contradiction - we indulge and waste what we have and at the same time demand change to our own behaviour. Because we are not capable of effecting change, nor do we desire it.

Tzeentch

The social protest is but a mere contradiction - we indulge and waste what we have and at the same time demand change to our own behaviour. — Metaphyzik

That's a very good point.

Isaac

weren’t all the previous challenges we’ve made it through as a species described as impossible by many? — Mark Dennis

Define 'made it through'. What criteria are you using to determine that we've 'made it' - mere survival of the species (I expect that's going to happen anyway at some level).

I look around me and see many items we take for granted... — Mark Dennis

Basically as good a description of the problem as you're ever going to get. Success measured by number of shiny items.

Which is the better motivator to actually act and contribute toward the problem within your area of it? For example, if I was pessimistic, would I have bothered to post and ask the question? — Mark Dennis

Positive thinking about the future is strongly associated with poor performance..

research has shown that positive thinking, in the form of fantasies about an idealized future, predicts low effort and poor performance.

Here's another of Oettingen's experiments, this time with charitable giving.

She's done similar research on small-scale environmental efforts (recycling, in this case) and found negative correlation between activity and positive future outlooks, but I can't find an internet version of this one.

SophistiCat

We believe that making even a small change in the past, would drastically alter the present. — Mark Dennis

No, we don't.

So is the Optimism butterfly the one we should be collectively stepping on? — Mark Dennis

Um, I think you got lost in your metaphors here. Stomping on an optimism butterfly is supposed to accomplish what? Extinguish optimism?

Yes, I have read the Bradbury story when I was a kid. But it's just a story, an entertaining thought experiment; besides, if you remember, the effect, as described in the story, was rather subtle, was felt tens of millions of years after the event, and was completely unpredictable - so no drastic changes from small disturbances and no apparent connection between cause and its distant effect. There are some chaotic systems in the world, but lucky for us, they are few and far between, otherwise any sort of stable, structured existence would have been impossible. For the most part, nature seems to be quite robust.

uncanni

A hand full of ultra-rich and power people in the world are both guilty and responsible for the critical problems we face. — Bitter Crank

I agree: this is the realistic view of what's happening. So I'm quite pessimistic unless power can be confiscated from those people. I can't imagine how that would happen.

I just want to ask why is it so difficult or impossible for people to realize and see clearly just how psychopathic all the elites are who mindlessly continue to destroy the planet and environment.

unenlightened

Thoughts, prayers, optimism, and pessimism are all really effective against climate change, along with all the other isms mentioned. Climate is a matter of faith and ideology.

Sarcasm alert.

uncanni

Climate is a matter of faith and ideology.
Sarcasm alert. — unenlightened

Sarcasm or irony? Are you being sarcastic or ironic about the entire discussion?

The statement, "Climate is a matter of faith and ideology," is vague. What is climate change a matter of???

Deleted User

↪SophistiCat

Um, I think you got lost in your metaphors here. Stomping on an optimism butterfly is supposed to accomplish what? Extinguish optimism?

Yeah it was pretty late when I was writing this and I did get lost in the metaphors a bit! Stepping on the Optimism butterfly in my mind at the time meant to choose to be optimistic but you’re right, it could be interpreted as stamping out optimism.

We believe that making even a small change in the past, would drastically alter the present.
— Mark Dennis

No, we don't.

We don’t? Everything I’ve read about chaos theory and time travel theory and every science fiction seems to indicate this and the margins aren’t always by millions of years. While literally stepping on one butterfly may be the sort of change that might take these magnitudes, to metaphorically choose the Optimism butterfly can mean a lot of different things to a lot of people. A working class man may invest a dollar a month toward climate change research or technology to fight climate change, his student daughter may believe there is a way and go to school to study to look for it, in order to join the scientist whose optimism makes him work and research for a solution in the first place and the scientists grandmother may decide to gift as much of her accumulated wealth as she can to her grandsons research. These are all examples of (Freeing instead of stepping on?) the Optimism butterfly.

Deleted User

↪Isaac

research has shown that positive thinking, in the form of fantasies about an idealized future, predicts low effort and poor performance.

I feel there is a difference here between unrealistic optimism and optimism coupled with realism.

Basically as good a description of the problem as you're ever going to get. Success measured by number of shiny items.

I actually agree with this, however I wasn’t describing this as things as a list of successes, but only as a list of things which previous generations would have thought impossible. Which they would have.

Define 'made it through'. What criteria are you using to determine that we've 'made it' - mere survival of the species (I expect that's going to happen anyway at some level).

Yeah the survival of the species will probably happen. The survival of our morals, culture and diversity is up for debate though. Those are things that I feel really need to be safeguarded as diversity increases long term survival.

As for morals... well when things start to get really bad you’ll see what I mean.

Deleted User

↪Bitter Crank

Emotional states are body states as everything psychological is biological, this is psychology 101. Optimism is easy enough to produce in your body at will if you know how.

Follow instructions here: Stand up, take up a wide stance, hands on your hips, look up, force yourself to put on the biggest grin you can, hold for 1 minute. Let me know how it goes.

Echarmion

We might also react with sorrow. Psychologically, this might not be a bad response to something we cannot individually do much about.

How should we react to climate change, with Pessimism or Optimism?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions