Enlil said:

We can argue about whether we have the capacity to rise above and overcome that nature enough to counteract the harm it causes, but there's no real argument that human nature isn't fundamentally barbaric.

---

Enlil said:

You're not going to give up your excess and neither am I.  99.999% of people won't.  That's the reality.

---

shivas.wisdom said:

Enlil said:

You're not going to give up your excess and neither am I.  99.999% of people won't.  That's the reality.

---

Except, even using your made-up percentage, some humans do! -- does something need the weight of the majority to be considered an aspect of human nature?

Another aspect of human nature: cognitive reflection and second-order intentions -- I notice that I want X, but I actually value Y more, so I'll choose Y -- even if most people choose not to give up their excess, that makes the alternative less common but no less human.

Your appeal to human nature here is, by all appearances, exactly as Lynnch suggested: a defense of a personal decision to do nothing by framing it as a biological certainty -- it's your personal choice on how you live your life, but at least own those decisions instead of pawning them off as the natural choice.

---

Enlil said:

I'm not sure what distinction you're trying to make between policy and conduct here.  Policy is only meaningful insofar as it affects conduct. Policy itself can't help or harm anyone.  It's the conduct in furtherance of policy that ultimately affects the physical reality around us.  Without that, policy is nothing more than an idea.

If I have a policy of hoarding all the food in my region, that's not gonna harm anyone.  If, however, I hoard all the food in my region, that's gonna be a problem.

---

Enlil said:

I'm the eternal optimist.  I fully believe in finding ways to use whatever pressure is available to nudge people into rising above their barbarism.  I'm all for it. We just have to be realistic and aware that if we do make strides forward, there will be backsliding, too.  People are all for improving things, but once they start noticing that their personal situations may be impacted negatively, then there's gonna be pushback.  If we can boil the frog incrementally, great. I just think we have to be aware that the road there is far longer than a straight line would be.  We also have to be aware that our allies today in such an endeavor will be our enemies tomorrow.  Mutual suffering is a tough sell, particularly in a world where there are no shortages of voices claiming to have the answer.

---

ashfiken said:

Enlil said:

I'm the eternal optimist.  I fully believe in finding ways to use whatever pressure is available to nudge people into rising above their barbarism.  I'm all for it. We just have to be realistic and aware that if we do make strides forward, there will be backsliding, too.  People are all for improving things, but once they start noticing that their personal situations may be impacted negatively, then there's gonna be pushback.  If we can boil the frog incrementally, great. I just think we have to be aware that the road there is far longer than a straight line would be.  We also have to be aware that our allies today in such an endeavor will be our enemies tomorrow.  Mutual suffering is a tough sell, particularly in a world where there are no shortages of voices claiming to have the answer.

---

Im fairly certain that incremental, would be the only way about this. Each generation will change and already is changing in its needs and expectations, morality, understanding, this makes incremental pull backs a bit easier over time imo. Every large hard path/problem is a slow grind a bit of push and pull to be sure. Certainly not a reason to think it cannot be facilitated.
But time is the key issue. I think we prob should have been working incrementally yesterday, and we arent even that very close(depends how fast one ages i guess) to beginning.
Suffering is a tough sell, looking around at americans rhrn especially. These ppl are so goddamned comfortable, obese, lazy, generally ignorant, and distracted.
So much so as i look at the "suffering" these folks would have to endure at the outset of these changes, its laughable a bit, they prolly fucking need it and the discipline.
First shit to go where nobody really loses out but would upset these ppl:
Lost access to red meat no more than 2x a week (unless you grew it)
Recycle or be treated as outcast
Must carpool or electric car or public transit(average american household owns 3 cars on avg iirc)
Treat homeless ppl with dignity
Just some ways i see consumption being reduced , which i guess is what you are referring to as suffering generally.
.
AHH THE SUFFERING!!!
Im jus an asshole ofc nd these are just some playful ideas i could see to better interact with the world. Im sure more serious ones could be had that would really upset the populace. But we should just take that slow. Maybe next gen, wont desire as much materially and would rather give back to humankind and the thing that keeps us alive, da earf

---