Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wtmusic

(39,166 posts)
27. All of us see the world and try to construct a mental analog,
Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:57 AM
Feb 2013

a model if you will, that makes sense to us. There's no way we can comprehend and analyze the whole of it so we simplify by necessity.

My model looks at your model and sees something overcomplicated to the point of uselessness. Mine, for better or worse, boils down to:

1) My more or less objective perception of the current state of affairs
2) My estimation of where things are headed
3) My personal assessment, based on my ethics, self-preservation, and past experiences as to where things should be headed
4) My ideas at what might bridge the gap between #2 and #3.

That's all that matters to me. I don't necessarily believe in free will, but I believe the determinism that guides our fate is much more complicated than you make it out to be - because this "maximizing power throughput" stuff is not only has no analog in human events, but in any other animal species. It's an attempt to formalize behavior like Bertrand Russell tried with logic - tempting, but doomed to failure. People and animals have consciously changed their behaviors to ensure survival - that's part and parcel of the deterministic way they're wired. People, arguably, are even capable of changing the way they change their behaviors. How can metabehaviors be explained in terms of simplistic power-throughput equations? It's not a monkey typing Shakespeare, but a sea slug.

As an example - if your theory was correct, the CO2 output of the US would have gone up as the economic growth has returned in the last few years. But it hasn't. A cynic can look at that result and create all kinds of excuses for why it's an illusion, but can't justify them - the fact is, at least to some extent, that public perception of the problem of global warming is acting as a stimulus for behavioral and/or policy changes. Activism that includes changing ourselves. We can argue all day whether it's enough to make a difference, but even allowing that discussion is an admission that we aren't doomed to a predetermined fate. We're simply not as helpless as you think we are.

Brand is not an authority on this topic kristopher Feb 2013 #1
Of course he's an authority... and he absolutely demolished Jacobsen FBaggins Feb 2013 #9
AGREED!! PamW Feb 2013 #23
I also agree. dumbcat Feb 2013 #43
xkcd... gcomeau Feb 2013 #2
nice phantom power Feb 2013 #3
I'm down for that wtmusic Feb 2013 #5
He is 100% correct dbackjon Feb 2013 #4
No, he isn't. kristopher Feb 2013 #6
I will take your disapproval as a sign I am correct dbackjon Feb 2013 #7
Now that's not fair FBaggins Feb 2013 #12
I like a lot of what Brand has to say, but he's wrong about nuclear. diane in sf Feb 2013 #20
H. T. Odum had something to say about situations like this. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #8
Wouldn't it be great if we could maximize power intake wtmusic Feb 2013 #10
I frankly don't think it's possible. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #11
Energy is available to both of us right now wtmusic Feb 2013 #13
Good questions. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #17
I wanted to thank you for your thoughtful answer wtmusic Feb 2013 #19
One of the most cogent posts I've seen in a long while. Thanks. n/t appal_jack Feb 2013 #21
All of us see the world and try to construct a mental analog, wtmusic Feb 2013 #27
I'll make a strong claim for the simplicity of this framework. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #28
I think that's a bit wonky GG. joshcryer Feb 2013 #14
The global economy is expanding. The world population is still growing. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #15
Yeah, that's the paradox of capitalist development, though. joshcryer Feb 2013 #18
I respectfully disagree. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #22
Capitalism required inequitible development globally. joshcryer Feb 2013 #24
How do you get a scenario where every country grows at the same rate? GliderGuider Feb 2013 #25
Smart primitivists realizing private property is a scam. joshcryer Feb 2013 #29
Wishing up scenarios is one thing. Real life is quite another. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #30
There are examples. See the Aka. joshcryer Feb 2013 #31
Remnant low-energy cultures like the Aka, !Kung, Pirahã and Penan GliderGuider Feb 2013 #32
It's hard for me to see how high energy equates authoritarianism. joshcryer Feb 2013 #33
The issue is energy quality, and work GliderGuider Feb 2013 #34
It sucks to be you? wtmusic Feb 2013 #37
Tell it to the laws of thermodynamics. nt GliderGuider Feb 2013 #38
Thermodynamics says nothing about goals wtmusic Feb 2013 #39
OK, how about "ultimate end state"? GliderGuider Feb 2013 #40
How are you defining "waste"? wtmusic Feb 2013 #41
Waste heat = an increase in system disorder = entropy GliderGuider Feb 2013 #42
By the way, thanks for your comment about language. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #44
"low energy density is the primary hallmark of low energy quality" kristopher Feb 2013 #45
Sorry - it's actually low energy "transformity" that's the hallmark of low quality. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #46
Someone, somewhere, will do it cheaper and dirtier with the same energy sources . . . hatrack Feb 2013 #16
Stewart Brand...hadn't heard that name in a while. HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #26
Stewart Brand is a nutjob that makes money bilking RW nutjobs jpak Feb 2013 #35
Thanks for kick wtmusic Feb 2013 #36
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Stewart Brand: Why Enviro...»Reply #27