The follow up paper to our book just came out in the latest issue of Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy. Here is the abstract:
In our book Global Insanity we argued that the existential predicament faced by humanity is a predictable consequence of Western Enlightenment thinking and the resulting world model, whose ascendance with the Industrial Revolution entrained development of the global consumer Economy that is destroying the biosphere. This situation extends from a dominant mindset based on the philosophy of reductionism. The problem was recognized and characterized by Robert M. Hutchins. In 1985, Hutchins ideas were discussed by Robert Rosen in Chapter 1 of Anticipatory Systems: Philosophical, Mathematical & Methodological Foundations. Building on Hutchins’ ideas, Rosen laid the foundation for an entire new, non-reductionist paradigm, which he called “complexity theory”. This new paradigm is what we are further developing here. One has to recognize that a paradigm shift is needed to overcome the entrenched mindset and world model that reductionism has created. Here we explore the myriad interconnected ways—psychological, social, cultural, political, and technological—that the Western world model and consumer economy works as a complex system to thwart, neutralize, or co-opt for its own ends any effort to bring about the kind of radical change that is needed to avert global ecological catastrophe and societal collapse. This resistance to change stems from the need, inherent in the Western model, to continually grow the consumer economy. The media’s continued portrayal of consumptive economic growth as a good thing, the widely held belief that the Economy is paramount, and current political and technological trends all manifest the system’s active resistance to change. From the perspective of the mature economic system, any work that does not serve to grow the Economy is counterproductive, and viewed as unnecessary, a luxury, or subversive. The potential for real change (i.e. toward creation of a better system) is thus inversely related to the viability of the Economy, which will eventually decline as the system develops into senescence. To the extent that the fragile metastability of senescence affords opportunity for radical change, economic decline can be viewed as a hopeful sign. But taking maximum advantage of that opportunity will be extraordinarily difficult, as it will require widespread recognition of the problem, major voluntary sacrifice by the relatively large numbers of people who still benefit from the system (including what remains of the “middle class”), and concerted “grassroots” efforts. It can be expected that the system will resist those efforts until the end, becoming increasingly reliant on media-enabled distraction and divisive politics, as well as violent coercion, to maintain itself.
Investment in education and science is widely touted as necessary for improving our situation, but this is misguided as long as the educational system and scientific enterprise continue to work in collusion with the larger system, as they currently do. Until the reductionist mindset and world model that drives the system is effectively challenged, there can be little hope for the kind of change needed to avert the catastrophic collapse of civilization.
For those who wonder why this diary belongs here I refer you to an ongoing series of diaries directed to political activists and other political people. This paper and the book it amplifies are a challenge to anyone who still clings to the present system and believes that there is an answer in so doing.
Please read on below and I'll comment on our current state of awareness and its potential for simply allowing the destructive forces we have set in motion to go on unchecked.
I'll start by telling you that the 2016 election, no matter how it turns out, will do little to change the course we are on. This may be hard to understand since our problems appear to arise from politics but there is a problem with that assignment of causality.
The illusion that our system has arisen and maintains itself by the way we govern ourselves is a reductionist simplification which, like all others, misses the point entirely. Our political, educational, and economic systems are the product of, not the cause of, our world view. That world view has deep deep roots in our collective consciousness ans is the source of all our models of how the world functions.
In our analysis we trace the origins of this world view to
Western Enlightenment thinking and the resulting world model, whose ascendance with the Industrial Revolution entrained development of the global consumer Economy that is destroying the biosphere. This situation extends from a dominant mindset based on the philosophy of reductionism. The problem was recognized and characterized by Robert M. Hutchins.
The system that has evolved has complex causal loops that involve every aspect of our culture and others as well. On the other hand the narrative we have accepted mostly destroys these relationships and dependencies and replaces them with a reductionist model based on illusory direct cause and effect relationships. Each time we try to manipulate the system using this false model we fail and try to patch it up in one way or another.
Meanwhile the system grinds on and our situation continues to deteriorate. The ineffectiveness of government, the inequalities of the economic system, and the way we are making the planet unlivable all are consequences of the way we have come to view the system and how far from reality that view really is.
I have been writing about his for some time and from the comments and reactions to what I say it is clear how tightly the dominant worldview has held most of us. The idea that we could be so far off the mark is very hard to comprehend. This is especially true when science and technology are so successful in the realm of machines and machine like models where reductionist thought has been so fruitful. What gets so easily missed is that most of the complex reality around us, including living systems and the planet system that sustains them, is fundamentally different from that machine world and can not be dealt with in the same way.
There are no short cuts to correcting our mistakes. As we point out in more detail in the paper:
One has to recognize that a paradigm shift is needed to overcome the entrenched mindset and world model that reductionism has created. Here we explore the myriad interconnected ways—psychological, social, cultural, political, and technological—that the Western world model and consumer economy works as a complex system to thwart, neutralize, or co-opt for its own ends any effort to bring about the kind of radical change that is needed to avert global ecological catastrophe and societal collapse.
What you need to see is very difficult to see. You can not deal with this as you do the "issues" that result from reductions operating on the false world model. A paradigm shift has to undo that mindset and replace. It has to get you out of the system you are locked into and give you the ability to look at it in a fresh, new way. Once this happens you can never go back. You can still play the old game but no longer as a believer.
If this happens your time and energy will no longer be easily diverted to things that help the system survive. Then, and only then you will be free to do the hard job of making the world a better place for future generations. Otherwise you are simply contributing to the problem and helping the system destroy the very place we hope to leave for future generations.