Featured Post

Entropy production delusion

It is common in knowledgeable circles to talk about the development of civilization in terms of entropy discussion. The term 'entropy...

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

What smart people, think, decide and do.

Smart people have left their positive implant on civilization over the ages and will continue to do so even during the senescence of our industrial civilization even though circumstances are not encouraging. They know their mortality will give them only a limited amount of time to strive to meet realistic goals. These goals generally depend on circumstances outside of their control. Africans, in the main, have to set their sights lower than most Americans or Australians. Those who are denied a good education through a range of possible factors can be smart by learning from other sources, including from the examples set by people successful in worthwhile fields. Females have to set their sights lower than males in those activities based on bodily strength but not necessarily on degree of smartness. It is not smart for talented musicians to strive for excellence in a sport for which their body is not suited.

Smart people do not just hope that their circumstance will improve. They will strive to make the decisions that will make the best use of their talents and skills to help family and friends to cope with reality. Smart people will not be conned by the media advertisements to buy goods they really do not need. They certainly will not be convinced by the rhetoric of politicians about about the merits of economic growth because they understand the ecological cost of the ravishing by the systems of civilization.

Smart people will strive to extract some wisdom from the vast amount of information produced by the digital revolution.

1 comment:

  1. Hi Denis

    As discussed, here are some comments to pick up the conversation from Facebook.

    I agree with almost all of your commentary, however would politely suggest that you are not the first to make the points you mention. David Holmgren, Bill Mollison, Nicole Foss, Rob Hopkins, George Mobiot, Geoff Lawton and many, many others have been writing and presenting on components or the entirety of your arguments for a number of years. David Holmgren's essays and books not only present Complex Adaptive Systems views of the predicament we face, but proposed solutions in the form of permaculture (permanent culture). I agree that his solutions are not 'all encompassing' but the further you look into them, the greater the thought and finesses becomes apparent. Of course his views and solutions contrast with views of other luminaries in the field, as is just and appropriate for such a complex issue (James Lovelock for example). I think Albert Bates article which attempts to chart all the current viewpoints is worth reviewing (http://permaculturenews.org/2014/02/13/recharting-collapseniks/).

    For me, the missing link in much of the debate is often the psychological aspects of change itself. Too many solutions focus on the technical, physical, educational or theoretical aspects of what to do, without acknowledging that the greatest barrier to 'us' achieving any of them is actually the individually willingness and capacity for change. Until we focus resources and research on why humans are not changing rapidly enough to ensure our survival, all the technical solutions in the world will not save us!

    Warm regards


    PS - I think your views and ideas are valuable, however I wonder if you wouldn't be better contributing to established debates / blogs, rather than trying to start your own. A couple worth considering as an author might be: