Whoa, this just in - super relevant to our issue this week is Dense Discovery's issue! It also talks about climate doomerism, and has some epic recommendations on combatting it. It also features Emily!
Climate change isn’t a problem that we can simply solve and move on from – it’s a predicament. Unlike problems, predicaments don’t have clear cut solutions. They demand our attention, creativity, and adaptability - and I love (really love) how this page calls to action this very thing. We can respond to climate change, we can manage its effects, but we can’t legislate it away or restore things to the way they once were.
Embracing this truth isn’t about admitting defeat; it’s about understanding the real stakes, trusting the scientific community and their data and facing this head-on. It’s about channeling our energies towards meaningful responses that respect the complexity of the situation.
The ‘okay doomer’ remark highlights a real tension between two forward-looking views. On one hand, there’s the Doomer, who’s bracing for inevitable hardships like food shortages, weather chaos, and political instability. Their outlook isn’t about pessimism; sometimes it’s simply about preparedness and facing reality.
On the other hand, there’s the Bloomer, driven by active engagement and positive change. They’re not naive; they recognize the same challenges but choose to meet them with hope and action.
These perspectives aren’t mutually exclusive. In my opinion, they can strengthen one another. The Doomer’s clear-eyed realism can ground the Bloomer’s optimism, while the Bloomer’s energy can inspire the Doomer to see potential even in dire circumstances. Together, I believe they create a balanced, intelligent approach to our shared future.
So I hope these two perspectives don’t become polarized (as we humans love to do - left vs right, dem vs repub), creating an unneeded division between people’s perspectives.
Whoa, this just in - super relevant to our issue this week is Dense Discovery's issue! It also talks about climate doomerism, and has some epic recommendations on combatting it. It also features Emily!
https://www.densediscovery.com/issues/251
We also loved the idea of this self-organised 1 week group course!
https://www.theweek.ooo/?utm_source=DenseDiscovery-251
https://spencerrscott.substack.com/p/emergencies-frameshifts-and-feedback I really liked this on climate and personal narratives!
Climate change isn’t a problem that we can simply solve and move on from – it’s a predicament. Unlike problems, predicaments don’t have clear cut solutions. They demand our attention, creativity, and adaptability - and I love (really love) how this page calls to action this very thing. We can respond to climate change, we can manage its effects, but we can’t legislate it away or restore things to the way they once were.
Embracing this truth isn’t about admitting defeat; it’s about understanding the real stakes, trusting the scientific community and their data and facing this head-on. It’s about channeling our energies towards meaningful responses that respect the complexity of the situation.
The ‘okay doomer’ remark highlights a real tension between two forward-looking views. On one hand, there’s the Doomer, who’s bracing for inevitable hardships like food shortages, weather chaos, and political instability. Their outlook isn’t about pessimism; sometimes it’s simply about preparedness and facing reality.
On the other hand, there’s the Bloomer, driven by active engagement and positive change. They’re not naive; they recognize the same challenges but choose to meet them with hope and action.
These perspectives aren’t mutually exclusive. In my opinion, they can strengthen one another. The Doomer’s clear-eyed realism can ground the Bloomer’s optimism, while the Bloomer’s energy can inspire the Doomer to see potential even in dire circumstances. Together, I believe they create a balanced, intelligent approach to our shared future.
So I hope these two perspectives don’t become polarized (as we humans love to do - left vs right, dem vs repub), creating an unneeded division between people’s perspectives.
That’s my two cents anyway. Thanks!
- Sam