Do we need Deep Adaptation to climate change or a Deep Transformation?

 Jeremy Lent believe that we need the latter, a deep transformation. Then we can stop climate change and save civilisation. 


Jem Bendell, the founder of Deep Adaptation (to climate change) means that it is too late. We have to prepare for a civilization crash. 

We have to learn to use  permaculture, to grow our own food and to live near freshwater. 

And we have just ten years to prepare for that.... 


As you can see on this film from Nasa, the change in temperature has rapidly increased the last decades. 


 

It seems clear that the temperature is increasing fast and it's because of human activity. 

Already now people are suffering from the effects of the climate change.  

you can read about it. for instance, here; 

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/global-warming-effects/

Well, I'm not an scientist and cannot predict the future. 

But there are visions for a sustainable world: 

Jeremy Lent means that Bendell is defaitstic. If everyone would think like Bendell, no one would try to stop climate change (or the tragic extinction of insects and animals). 


Bendell answers in an interesting text on the Deep Adaptation site. Bendell is so sure of his view that de decided to not have children. Anyway you can judge for yourselves - Lent's critic is included in the text:  

https://jembendell.com/2019/04/10/responding-to-green-positivity-critiques-of-deep-adaptation/

Right now the Corona virus is in everybody's lips, and in some bodies too.... But  the consequences of climate change will probably much more severe than this virus. 


Both Bendell and Lent share the view that we have to change our way of living. 

Maybe we have to to be aware of our thoughts, feelings first - and the best way to do that is probably by meditation. We cannot get rid of them or control the monkey mind - but we can be aware of the monkeys in the mind.... 


 '

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more