7 Philosophies on the Future
Frankly #77
In last week’s Frankly, I shared my thoughts on some of the polarities we’ll need to harmonize as we journey towards a more uncertain world. As the holidays approach for many, we will face these “polarities” head-on in relationships with family, friends, and neighbors. How could imagining the different perspectives of others allow us to have more meaningful and empathic conversations about the future?
In today’s Frankly, I highlight seven views of the future and how broadening our awareness to include others’ starting points might allow for greater discourse and understanding. How we view the future stems from what we care about and our expectations for humanity – from needing to stay focused solely on daily struggles to believing we’re on an endless path towards living outside our own solar system. Perhaps an even bigger factor is whether we believe we can change the trajectory of the future or if our species is simply stuck on a predetermined outcome.
How do common beliefs and fears for the future - such as colonizing Mars, degrowth, societal collapse, or climate catastrophes - shape our philosophies for the future? And while many of us may think that we have a strong synthesis of our economic, ecological, and geopolitical realities, why should we think that any one of us can predict the future with 100% certainty? Finally, how could we use these lenses when listening to others - and take a first step in a likely “bend not break” future?
In case you missed it…
This week, I was joined by agronomist & economist André Guimarães to explore the historical context – and modern expansion – of deforestation in Brazil; the difficult relationship between local economies, animal agriculture, and the health of the Amazon at large; and the role of policy in shaping environmental and developmental outcomes. André emphasized the importance of indigenous peoples in conservation efforts, as well as the responsibility to ‘act locally while thinking globally’ to ensure that the Amazon can continue to provide not only for its inhabitants, but for the world at large.
If you appreciate The Great Simplification podcast…
Be sure to leave a review on your preferred podcast platform! Leaving reviews helps the podcast grow, which helps spread awareness of our systemic situation from experts in ecology, energy, policy, economics, technology, and community building so that we can better understand - and respond to - the challenges of the coming decade.
The Great Simplification podcast is produced by The Institute for the Study of Energy and Our Future (ISEOF), a 501(c)(3) organization. We want to keep all content completely free to view globally and without ads. If you’d like to support ISEOF and it’s content via donation, please use the link below.
I am a doomer some times and not at others. What I think happens with some people is that the expectation of impending collapse of civilization gets to them and they start to wish it to happen already.
I try to have a more balanced approach were I try to preserve the things I would like to survive the current crisis and prefere for the worst. Not that there is a lot of preparing to be made.
I think I am with you, nick. Planned degrowth may be some sort of compromise which could result in human and biodiversity survival. I don’t care about super wealthy people or dictators. Or mainstream propagandists. We in the USA are living in a sad dystopian dream where we somehow think that we are correct about everything when we usually are not. Gaza comes to mind. Really people, killing unarmed civilians is evil, but allowed to continue nonstop because: the Bible?? Oil in the Mediterranean? Beach property for the ultra-rich?? Domination of the dispossessed? Thus, I think that the trees, plants, oceans, animals, and insects, not to mention plankton, which it turns out is super cool and very complex, are much more interesting and deserving than humans. This put me squarely in the collapse accepting category, which maybe is where I do belong.