This article is a bit like telling you to lock the stable door after the horse has bolted. Climate change is upon us and governments and world leaders are taking it seriously (with the exception of Donald Trump if I remember correctly). Anyway, I have no solutions; I would just like to make some points that I think are relevant.
The first point is that the Universe is an organic whole (according to the findings of Quantum Physics). Our position as human beings is similar to that of a cell in the human body. It does not matter whether an individual cell in the body lives or dies as long as the Universe survives and is in a state of well-being. So, taking the logic further it does not matter if the human race – or even all life forms on our planet – lives or dies as long as the well-being of the Universe continues.
As cells in the body of the Universe our job is to serve the Universe. And it can be assumed that if we do serve the Universe, then it will do what is necessary to ensure our survival. I have no easy answers to the question of how to go about serving the Universe. The Universe does not appoint people as spokespersons to tell us what it required us to do. But possibly the answers to how to serve the Universe can be found in established religious teachings (which purport to serve God).
At any rate if we learn just this much – that it is necessary for us to learn detachment when dealing with such issues like climate change then we will have got our money’s worth.
The second point is that there are I think many experts who say that the threat of climate change is fake news. Or they say that climate change may be happening but it is not caused by anything that the human race is doing. This may very well be true (I have no way of knowing) but it would be better to play it safe and assume as little risk of catastrophic climate events happening by doing what we can to avert climate change. The point I am trying to make is that the survival of the human race may be at stake and if we are to err, it is better to err on the side of caution and take the threat of climate change seriously. Even if it turns out that our caution was unfounded, the human race will still survive. But if we ignore the threat and it turns out to be real then the human race may be facing extinction.
There will, of course, be the fact that many industries will be shut down if we are to tackle the threat on a war footing. Many people will lose their jobs and may find it difficult to survive. But – being very cold blooded about it – these will just be individual tragedies and not a worldwide catastrophe.
The third point I want to make is how to evaluate the advice of experts. When dealing with such large issues we would like to play it safe and consult many experts. Here I can do no better than to refer you to a passage from Sceptical Essays by Bertrand Russell:
The scepticism that I advocate amounts to no more than this: 1) that when the experts are agreed, then the opposite opinion cannot be held to be certain; 2) that when they are not agreed, then no opinion can be held to be certain by a non-expert; 3) that when they all hold that no sufficient grounds for a positive opinion exist, the ordinary man would do well to suspend his judgment.
Climate change is a very large issue and involves perhaps the risk of our survival or at the very least the jobs and livelihoods of a large number of people. The governments have to factor in well being to the people who have elected them to power. It would be ideal if all experts are agreed – one way or the other – about the threat but that not being the case we (or rather the governments) need to make sound judgments with as much humility as possible.
The fourth point is quite silly. I would like to say that the reason governments in a democracy are in a quandary is that the future generations do not have the vote. If it was possible that future generations could be given the vote than there would be no indecisiveness on the part of democratic governments.
The last point is that all governments should do what they can to encourage new industries and professions that are environment friendly. If not now then perhaps 30 or 50 years from now perhaps most people will be gainfully employed in ways that are not endangering the environment.
I’ll end here. Hope this helps someone. Please explore this blog for more articles on Politics, Spirituality and Self Help. If you liked this article then please share it on Facebook and Twitter and feel free to post your comments or contact me. Link to contact is below.
Find this handy. Buy me a coffee