Climate Change- Are Our Genes to Blame for our Inaction?

[Rissask]

Jacko and others, you might be interested in this article that was in Cosmos magazine.

Stone Age instincts, modern emergency - Could it be that our genes and evolutionary heritage are responsible for our failure to tackle climate change?

Almost on a daily basis we hear dire warnings about the future consequences of climate change, whether it be rising sea levels, increasing droughts and extreme weather events, or decreasing availability of food and water.


Such changes are a serious threat to humanity and place our civilisation at risk. So why aren't we taking action? I'm going to explore the nexus between our failure to tackle climate change and our genetic and cultural heritage.


Our behaviour is a product of the interplay between instinct or 'gut feeling', cultural, religious and political beliefs, and rational thought. We may understand the issues surrounding climate change in a rational sense, but I believe our instincts and culture are pulling us in the opposite direction, contributing to a sense of paralysis.


Our instincts were shaped by natural selection in our distant past, which favoured attributes that now put civilisation at risk. Most of our evolutionary history occurred before the advent of man, and 99% of mankind's evolution occurred while we were still hunters and gatherers.


Sustainability was rarely an issue; if resources became depleted in one area, tribes could often move to new areas or expand their home range. In situations where this was impossible, the genes that favoured aggression and acquisitiveness would have been beneficial.


Competitiveness and materialism may also have been selected as male attributes since they would have contributed to reproductive success in a society that valued males with influence and wealth.


As a consequence of this heritage, our instincts are to populate, to be competitive, acquisitive and to use resources with little thought for the future.


With the advent of farming and civilisation, these traits led to overuse of resources and environmental degradation. The results led to the demise of many civilisations, as detailed by Jared Diamond in his book Collapse. Since the industrial revolution the problems have been compounded by rising carbon emissions and now threaten modern civilisation.


Of course, human evolution also resulted in the ability to use language and to imitate and to develop cultural traditions. However there is a flipside to our tendency to respond to cultural beliefs and ideas. Firstly, many of these beliefs arose when sustainability was not an issue, and secondly, we are susceptible to negative cultural influences, including some aspects of politics, religion, consumerism and advertising.


Many of these maladaptive cultural beliefs reinforce genetic traits that are inappropriate with respect to long-term sustainability. Examples include the desire of many people to have large families and to achieve an excessively high standard of living, and the practice of living in the present without due consideration for the future.


So both our genetic instincts and cultural beliefs may work against our long-term interests and the values we need in a world of finite resources and finite capacity to absorb pollution.

What do you think? I think this is pretty much what I always say on the subject, the viewpoint I get critized for as being too 'cynical'....but it is really cynical if there are evolutionary reasons for it?

[Mexivoof]

I don't know, some how those Indians with their peace pipes and smoke signals managed to chase the glaciers away. Thanks Tribe!!

[katmumn]

I think on a personal level it can feel overwhelming. My electric bill arrived last night and I sat there looking at it wondering if I'm crazy to voluntarily pay an extra $20 or so a month to buy wind energy. But then my next thought was about all of the other things I should be doing and felt like I wasn't doing enough.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

Jacko and others, you might be interested in this article that was in Cosmos magazine.

Stone Age instincts, modern emergency - Could it be that our genes and evolutionary heritage are responsible for our failure to tackle climate change?






What do you think? I think this is pretty much what I always say on the subject, the viewpoint I get critized for as being too 'cynical'....but it is really cynical if there are evolutionary reasons for it?

Of course the first bolded sentence is exactly right and we are in a battle between our evolutionary history as clans of cave people and our desire to learn how to react more civilized now that we are trying to exist outside of the caves in cities of millions.

We may or may not succeed...but I think we are better off continuing to try to find a more eco-balanced answer...it is in our better interests.

Of course we at least have the potential to do better and certainly the brains to learn how to improve.....so therefore you remain a cynical, yet somehow still lovable debater, even given our evolutionary "tendencies"......or perhaps you remain lovable BECAUSE of my evolutionary tendencies...........

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by katmumn

I think on a personal level it can feel overwhelming. My electric bill arrived last night and I sat there looking at it wondering if I'm crazy to voluntarily pay an extra $20 or so a month to buy wind energy. But then my next thought was about all of the other things I should be doing and felt like I wasn't doing enough.

I hear you..but I recommend you first invest your money in things that will directly SAVE you more money than you invest.

Now if EVERYONE would do that........

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by Jacko

I hear you..but I recommend you first invest your money in things that will directly SAVE you more money than you invest.

Now if EVERYONE would do that........

I hate to break this to you, man....but we are on our way to breaking 8 billion people on the planet by 2050 or so...and the majority will be born in countries where they really don't give a crap about wind energy or bio fuels, let alone have environmental laws and legislation.

That is just reality, my lovable cynicism notwithstanding.

[katmumn]

Originally Posted by Jacko

I hear you..but I recommend you first invest your money in things that will directly SAVE you more money than you invest.

Now if EVERYONE would do that........

I already did as much of that as I can do for right now (high efficiency furnace, appliances, storm windows, insulation) for the house.

It's the transportation issue I struggle with. I took the bus for a week when the car was in the shop and an extra 2.5 hours a day for public transit. So I still drive to work every day.

[sctx]

Stone Age instincts...ok.... I think we should all run around naked, burning patchouli incense, and chanting like pagans in an effort to seduce Mother Nature into sending us into another Ice Age

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

I hate to break this to you, man....but we are on our way to breaking 8 billion people on the planet by 2050 or so...and the majority will be born in countries where they really don't give a crap about wind energy or bio fuels, let alone have environmental laws and legislation.

That is just reality, my lovable cynicism notwithstanding.

So throw in the towel, eh?

Your cynicism seems only matched by your defeatism (if I actually believed that you live the way you postulate...which I don't)....no sense dragging this out, right? Lets just all go and burn it all as quickly as we can.....

Some people will give a crap as it becomes more in their interest to do so....others once they are educated to understand why it is in their interest...both of these areas we have some control of.....

I am certainly not sure if it is enough...there are a LOT of dumb people in the world who don't think we should do anything....I believe only a few believe they should do nothing because they don't think we have an ultimate chance of changing anything...most just don't understand the impact they might have and why it might be in their interest to make the changes.....

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by katmumn

I already did as much of that as I can do for right now (high efficiency furnace, appliances, storm windows, insulation) for the house.

It's the transportation issue I struggle with. I took the bus for a week when the car was in the shop and an extra 2.5 hours a day for public transit. So I still drive to work every day.

Good for you! I admire your struggle to find ways to make it better...in the smaller and larger sense it IS important how you make the journey I think.

[melliedee]

Climate change AND evolution? What, you couldn't fit The Golden Compass in the title too?

The evolutionary argument makes sense as much of our time as modern homo sapiens was spent as nomadic hunter gatherers. The depletion of natural resources had such a lesser impact than it does when you factor in industrialization,though. It's one thing to leave a small area stripped of natural resourses from gathering or even over planting (at least at the beginnings of agriculture) to lie fallow and return, quite another to expect the same for the massive areas which we are depleting on a much larger scale.

Not a pretty picture if we're hardwired not to care. But, as always, I don't buy the biological determinism as a total picture. If our culture values sustainibility, and slowly it is catching on in the west, it will push against the evolutionary considerations as surely as culture convinces us that other biological urges are no longer appropriate and need to be selected against. Maybe.

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by Jacko

So throw in the towel, eh?

Your cynicism seems only matched by your defeatism (if I actually believed that you live the way you postulate...which I don't)....no sense dragging this out, right? Lets just all go and burn it all as quickly as we can.....

Some people will give a crap as it becomes more in their interest to do so....others once they are educated to understand why it is in their interest...both of these areas we have some control of.....

I am certainly not sure if it is enough...there are a LOT of dumb people in the world who don't think we should do anything....I believe only a few believe they should do nothing because they don't think we have an ultimate chance of changing anything...most just don't understand the impact they might have and why it might be in their interest to make the changes.....

Whoa whoa whoa...back up the bus. Did you read the article, and if so, I can only assume that you disagree with the basic premise then? That it is basically in our nature to not be concerned about the future and squandering our resources?


I KNOW what you are saying, and even think you are correct...but I don't agree that is what is going to happen, is all.....and I think the notion that we will follow in the footsteps of the Easter Islanders and the Mayans is a very likely one.

And whether or not I think 'burning it all' is a good idea, the fact remains we ARE, and we will continue to, mine every last drop of oil and lump of coil and then all the uranium too- and only we will REALLY get down to brass tacks and start worrying seriously about conserving our resources.



Anyway, me thinking that way has very little to do with the way we live, which is wasteful in some typical North American ways (hell, my new car is a V6! and our house is bigger than it needs to be ) but pretty darn good in other ways (no kids, shoot deer for much of our meat, grow a garden, do lots of freezing and canning, etc.).

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Climate change AND evolution? What, you couldn't fit The Golden Compass in the title too?

The evolutionary argument makes sense as much of our time as modern homo sapiens was spent as nomadic hunter gatherers. The depletion of natural resources had such a lesser impact than it does when you factor in industrialization,though. It's one thing to leave a small area stripped of natural resourses from gathering or even over planting (at least at the beginnings of agriculture) to lie fallow and return, quite another to expect the same for the massive areas which we are depleting on a much larger scale.

Not a pretty picture if we're hardwired not to care. But, as always, I don't buy the biological determinism as a total picture. If our culture values sustainibility, and slowly it is catching on in the west, it will push against the evolutionary considerations as surely as culture convinces us that other biological urges are no longer appropriate and need to be selected against. Maybe.

I agree with melliedee on this...right down to the MAYBE....

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

Whoa whoa whoa...back up the bus. Did you read the article, and if so, I can only assume that you disagree with the basic premise then? That it is basically in our nature to not be concerned about the future and squandering our resources?


I KNOW what you are saying, and even think you are correct...but I don't agree that is what is going to happen, is all.....and I think the notion that we will follow in the footsteps of the Easter Islanders and the Mayans is a very likely one.

And whether or not I think 'burning it all' is a good idea, the fact remains we ARE, and we will continue to, mine every last drop of oil and lump of coil and then all the uranium too- and only we will REALLY get down to brass tacks and start worrying seriously about conserving our resources.



Anyway, me thinking that way has very little to do with the way we live, which is wasteful in some typical North American ways (hell, my new car is a V6! and our house is bigger than it needs to be ) but pretty darn good in other ways (no kids, shoot deer for much of our meat, grow a garden, do lots of freezing and canning, etc.).

Whoa , whoa , whoa...did you forget what I said? We can overcome our "basic nature"......MAYBE..I just don't see any point in expounding much on that grim possibility that you love to focus on....a defeatist cynic vs. a pragmatic optimist....

Originally Posted by Jacko

Of course the first bolded sentence is exactly right and we are in a battle between our evolutionary history as clans of cave people and our desire to learn how to react more civilized now that we are trying to exist outside of the caves in cities of millions.

We may or may not succeed...but I think we are better off continuing to try to find a more eco-balanced answer...it is in our better interests.

Of course we at least have the potential to do better and certainly the brains to learn how to improve.....so therefore you remain a cynical, yet somehow still lovable debater, even given our evolutionary "tendencies"......or perhaps you remain lovable BECAUSE of my evolutionary tendencies...........

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Climate change AND evolution? What, you couldn't fit The Golden Compass in the title too?

The evolutionary argument makes sense as much of our time as modern homo sapiens was spent as nomadic hunter gatherers. The depletion of natural resources had such a lesser impact than it does when you factor in industrialization,though. It's one thing to leave a small area stripped of natural resourses from gathering or even over planting (at least at the beginnings of agriculture) to lie fallow and return, quite another to expect the same for the massive areas which we are depleting on a much larger scale.

Not a pretty picture if we're hardwired not to care. But, as always, I don't buy the biological determinism as a total picture. If our culture values sustainibility, and slowly it is catching on in the west, it will push against the evolutionary considerations as surely as culture convinces us that other biological urges are no longer appropriate and need to be selected against. Maybe.

I was trying to think of how to incorporate abortion and Obama in there too, but I struggled.

Maybe, yes. But evolution, as you know, doesn't work that quickly.

It's easy to get discouraged when you read how even people who are somewhat educated and intelligent are saying things like climate change isn't real, the oil replenishes itself in the earth's crust....chupacabras are real, etc. I mean, I am rooting for us to come to our senses, but we don't have much time.

Originally Posted by Jacko

Whoa , whoa , whoa...did you forget what I said? We can overcome our "basic nature"......MAYBE..I just don't see any point in expounding much on that grim possibility that you love to focus on....a defeatist cynic vs. a pragmatic optimist....

So you are going to be the orchestra on the Titanic, playing while it goes down in flames? Either way, we all drown.

Of course we should try. I think you have a far more rosy view of man in general than I. Dumb mammal driven by genes and hormones, mostly.... versus enlightened and creative intellectual driven by the brain.

as usual, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle.