Given the fragmentation of meaning and value in our deeply divided, competitive and unsustainable world, it is difficult to see how clarity of both the heart and mind could be brought to bear on the global crisis facing humanity. Unfortunately, while the media merely mirrors the disconnect in our thinking and sensibilities without truly engaging readers, the scientific world generally presents an uncompromising logistical view on adaption and the survival of our species. Only a few it seems search for a wider view.
Recently a chief scientific adviser to the UK Government offered his response to the recent report of the International Panel on Climate Change:
‘The climate crisis is as much a rural problem as it is an urban one. It is both economic and human, domestic and international. This means transformation is required at every level of society: individuals, employers, institutions and international partners will need to work together to understand the trade-offs, agree compromises and seize opportunities. And just as scientists are pooling insights from diverse fields of expertise, policy makers will need to work in new ways, sharing ideas across the disciplines to plot a path from here to net zero. This is a whole systems challenge. Taking it will require a systemic approach.’ (excerpt from an article by Patrick Vallance. The Guardian, 8th August 2021)
If only it were a question of logistics. Indeed, while the scientists, economists, politicians muster and attempt to steer humanity on a new course, it is clear that the confused and deep seated obstructive aspects in human behaviour will need to be completely understood, if we are to develop a different way of living. To resort to some ideological setup or merely adapt to difficult circumstances would be to miss an opportunity to learn at a deeper level and act with intelligence.
Our world has entered a new epoch, designated the Anthropocene. This new geological period follows the Holocene age, which began at the end of the last great ice age some 10,000 years ago and saw the expansion of human potential in diverse civilizations. In our own time science & technology and the overall pressures of human population are now radically redefining all aspects of evolved life and change on this planet with often catastrophic results.
We are clearly at a critical point in our world process. What must we do to find our true place in the bigger picture ?
The following selection of articles, audio-visual documentaries & talks explore recent developments in the science of change and their consequences, which can further our understanding of the processes that support or destroy the web of life on this planet .
The global consequences of man induced change to the earths climate was clearly stated by Carl Sagan 1985.
While the main focus of the Journal is concerned with a fundamental change at the root of consciousness, during this time of climate crisis when the culminative effects of human activity, has put the earths ecosphere in grave danger, the establishment of universal laws to prevent further damage is crucial. In the passage below the late Polly Higgins presents the case.
‘There are two terms in law that we rarely hear today: malum in se, which means ‘wrong in itself’ and malum prohibitum, which means ‘wrong because it is prohibited’. Polly Higgins (1968-2019)
Full article available courtesy of Resurgence & Ecology magazine link below:
https://www.resurgence.org/magazine/article3554-what-will-your-legacy-be.html
We have become both a danger to ourselves and the planet as a whole.
The development of machine’ intelligence’ and genetic engineering begs the question of how do we define intelligence. Our species capacity for reasoning has been spectacularly successful in translating the natural world into increasingly complex semantic networks and data. But can intelligence be developed artificially or enhanced biologically through intervention at the deep structural level of the organism? Our proclivity for language and its component skills has made us extraordinary adaptive creatures with the freedom to explore a world in which man has become dominant and thought has come to dominate man. Where is integral intelligence in all this? With the increasing ability to deconstruct living organisms and replicate both thought and sensory data in bionic forms, science and technology have added a curious twist to our ‘adaptive’ capacity as a species.
Best to ask oneself what kind of relationship do we want with the natural world and how does the manmade environment we have collectively created compare.
With much of the intent and purpose of our busy world ending in chaos, what will it take to turn it around and live without fear and the ravages of dissatisfaction? To merely adapt to an environment increasingly dominated by the products of thought will no doubt lead us into some awful evolutionary culdesac of our own making. Despite our extraordinary ingenuity, societies worldwide are no less conflicted than any we might read about in the history books. The order we struggle to maintain in our more sophisticated times is no less likely to fail for lack of intelligence and compassion. While faith in progressive change has greatly diminished in the harsh realities of today’s world, change itself remains the constant if not immutable reality we all live with. By looking through and beyond the common boundaries that determine the way we perceive change will determine the depth or shallowness of our lives.,
Are We Still Evolving? Preview – BBC < press to play.
A video interview that questions the wisdom of attempting to genetically engineer ‘intelligent’ children.
BBC A Point of View
John Gray warns of the dangers of science that attempts to biologically enhance human abilities. He says such knowledge can jeopardize the very things that make us human.
More than 70 years after C.S. Lewis wrote “The Abolition of Man”, John Gray argues that Lewis’ questions are even more relevant today than they were then. “The scientists of Lewis’s generation were dissatisfied with existing humankind” he writes. “Using new techniques, they were convinced they could design a much improved version of the species”.
But Gray says that while the scientific knowledge needed to remould humanity hardly existed then, it is rapidly developing at the present time.
He believes that the science of bio-engineering and artificial intelligence carry serious risks. “If at some unknown point in the future it becomes feasible to remould ourselves according to our dreams” he writes, “the result can only be an impoverishment of the human world”.
Listen to more of what he has to say here on this BBC broadcast:
An introduction to an ecological experiment which began in Arizona in the early 1990’s
Odyssey in 2 biospheres
Building a new world inside a greenhouse ?
Insight and comments by one of the participants.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/magazine-41151951/building-a-new-world-inside-a-giant-greenhouse
I III