We had another Socratic seminar this week, (These will be a regular occurrence from now on.) this time focused around the question of "why bother?" in relation to combating climate change, and promoting sustainable, locally grown produce. The seminar, I think, was quite successful. I think the general consensus within that conversation was that "Change within the food industry can only happen once individuals change their lifestyles." I agree with that wholeheartedly, but the thing I was asking myself throughout the entirety of this seminar was,
Why bother TALKING ABOUT THIS?
Before I go off on quite a tangent, I'll address the weird public ignorance that clouds the issue of global warming. It's been strange, growing up within an era of unrivaled attention brought to the issue. I've felt pretty confused the by the weight and magnitude associated with climate change, the countless hours spent in class, and in front of a T.V. watching educational programs; people are more educated about climate change than ever before, and people sure have gotten good at complaining about politicians pandering around a hardline stance on global warming, but it seems like people are less willing than ever to make profound changes to their lifestyles that would actually benefit the environment. Regardless of the fruitful conversation of that seminar, to me, and I bet to every other student sat 'round that table, the seminar will always be little more than just conversation. It's a sad irony. A conversation meant to prod the up-and-coming generation not to fall into the trap of "loudly complaining about things to other people, yet not actually doing anything about it myself" ended up inevitably falling into that same trap. The entire issue to me, seems like a "You move first!" sort of deal. Which brings me into the idea of:
Human exceptionalism
The idea that man is somehow different from all the other life on the planet, and that makes us deserving of rights that all other life is not allowed. The same can be said about the attitude of the individual versus the rest of mankind. People optimize their surroundings to fit their needs, shaping and manipulating all around them to acquiesce an entirely new purpose. People would rather alter the context they live in, to live in the comfort of technology and specialization rather than adapt to a dynamic and changing world. As mentioned last post, this on a global scale has devolved into the mass systemic manipulation of the lifecycles of the domestic crop, and livestock. This isn't relegated specifically to the food industry, but all production systems generally. (Switch out plants and livestock for whatever goes into that product, and you've got an endless cycle of litany and excess.) Nearly two centuries of industrial evolution has led to the modern consumerist identity that has such a tight grip on American culture. Purchases from the growing middle class shift further away from raw necessity, and more commodity products. As is the issue with monoculture, our society has become so deeply ingrained in industrialization, and that's unlikely to change within our lifetimes. So the question, again, becomes:
WHY BOTHER?
Why bother pointlessly struggling to adopt change, when what we've been doing seems to work for us? We know that there are inherent flaws with the way things work. Inequities, long term viability. And that latter thing is the key term really. Long term viability. Every generation passes it's unresolved issues onto the next, and it's ball is in the park for millennials to take a swing at the inherently connected issues of global warming, monoculture, and industrialization.
As for the individual, the question becomes,
"Why bother changing for a world that won't change for me?"
I want to answer this question in terms of my own life. The uncertainty of the future terrifies me. No one can predict the outcome of one’s life regardless of any planning. (That’s why structure, bureaucracy, and the-entirety-of-my-current-context are stupid dumb garbage that sucks ass.) Despite any sort of intervention, things within the grand scale of things will simply carry along as if you had never existed. So, what is the point? Really, I don't care. And I think that is the answer, for me at least. I don't want to waste my hours away trying to solve something I don't really care about. I'll just yell about it a bit, and leave someone else to actually solve the problem later. In the meantime, I'll be playing Counter-Strike or something. Riding on the theme of futility and pointlessness, here's a lovely image inspired by David Bowie's Space Oddity. (That song is a whole 'nother can of worms for another time.)
As for the individual, the question becomes,
"Why bother changing for a world that won't change for me?"
I want to answer this question in terms of my own life. The uncertainty of the future terrifies me. No one can predict the outcome of one’s life regardless of any planning. (That’s why structure, bureaucracy, and the-entirety-of-my-current-context are stupid dumb garbage that sucks ass.) Despite any sort of intervention, things within the grand scale of things will simply carry along as if you had never existed. So, what is the point? Really, I don't care. And I think that is the answer, for me at least. I don't want to waste my hours away trying to solve something I don't really care about. I'll just yell about it a bit, and leave someone else to actually solve the problem later. In the meantime, I'll be playing Counter-Strike or something. Riding on the theme of futility and pointlessness, here's a lovely image inspired by David Bowie's Space Oddity. (That song is a whole 'nother can of worms for another time.)