How are you?

It is quite common to find in ethnographic readings on indigenous peoples how they establish links close with their environment or territory. In issue 34 of the AETG (Spanish Association of Gestalt Therapy) magazine, dedicated to the Mother, there is an article by anthropologist Peter Rawitscher from Berkeley describing the relationship of the people of Sierra Nueva, in Colombia, with their territory and environment.

For these peoples —Kogi, Arhuaco, Wiwa and Kankuamo— territory and environment is the Mother, they work to heal and care for Mother —Nature— and, simultaneously, the human body is the same material and spiritual body of the territory. Thus, land management and well being of the body are part of the same spiritual order. Every action, thought and emotion of the person affects the territory, and, conversely, any characteristic of the territory affects the person.

At one point, he says that at a meeting of the Wiwa was discussed what to do with neighboring peasants that were fishing and carrying out illegal mining activities in the rivers, threatening both the indigenous territory and communities. While some indigenous proposed a denounce, the shaman said, and I quote: ‘We are responsible. We are attracting the problem, thinking evil among ourselves, without respecting the law of origin. We are affecting the Mother, and She is taking us in the form of theft of our territory. We must confess and clean this’. According to the author, they decided to make some personal healing work following the shaman’s instructions and achieved to disappear external problem generated by neighboring farmers.

Inhabitants of Vanuatu, near New Guinea —Photo Jimmy Nelson

This type of look, which shares a common sense of the experience of being affected and be affecting an environment —including people—, a look of care and respect, contrasts sharply with the western look. I do not want to fall into the myth of the noble savage and superstitions that accompany about living closer to nature —a way of saying they live closer than instinctive—, living better with little and be happier than us. Maybe in some ways yes, in others no. Maybe the weight of the group can sometimes be overwhelming for people who compose this type of societies.

Many years ago I was told, and I hope not an urban legend, that the American —I do not know which one concretely— were posed how their decisions could potentially affect the seventh generation of descendants. In our Western societies, where what it prevails and exalts is the individual and the immediate, we are at the other pole, engrossed in ourselves, lost in what happens to me in particular. Lost also mentally, explaining it all in a logical and rational way, running away from any situation that sounds or smells emotional. We are also lost in the game of appear, creating an unquestionable and unwavering picture of me: from the obsession with our physical presence —a monotheistic conception of beauty—, giving the impression that we have everything under control or that things are going very well. What matters is what happens to me, what matters is success. We not see or look beyond our navels.

Often strikes me how little we ask each other how we are, not to look good, but with a real interest in the other. It seems the other exists just to compare us with him, or to solve the own needs. Ironically we feel very alone and one of the diseases most diagnosed is depression.

We Westerners might regain some of that group sense, careful and respectful, and consider how our attitudes, decisions and individual actions affect others and ourselves. Also in our environment. The paradox is that to begin to see the other, we must begin to look at our inside. Although with different eyes.

Related posts
array(2) { [0]=> int(899) [1]=> int(105) }
array(4) { [0]=> object(WP_Post)#1637 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(6973) ["post_author"]=> string(4) "2046" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2014-07-28 00:01:55" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2014-07-27 22:01:55" ["post_content"]=> string(4677) "No hace mucho, leí estupefacto que una persona moría devorada por un león en presencia de sus familiares, quienes, desde el coche que abandonó para fotografiar de cerca al animal, contemplaban el espectáculo aterrados. No es que tal insensatez sea un fenómeno muy común entre los visitantes de la reserva, pero creo que en algún grado la desconexión general del ser humano con el medio biológico en el cual ha evolucionado le ha hecho perder un saber instintivo cuyo vacío ha sido ocupado por una estúpida visión paternalista hacia la naturaleza. Hasta los documentales emitidos por televisión sobre los animales tienen que montarse describiendo un pequeño argumento con final feliz para el destino del animal, que no hieran el bienestar moral del espectador. W_deleonesyhombres Da qué pensar esta poca identificación entre el hombre y la naturaleza. En Girona, alguien que sufrió una fuerte indigestión denunció al ayuntamiento por dejar crecer en un parque público el tipo de setas no comestibles que ingirió. El ayuntamiento tuvo que erradicarlas de sus parques. La domesticación deliberada de la naturaleza por el hombre oculta que integramos un sistema orgánico en el que el buen funcionamiento de una de sus células se corresponde con el buen funcionamiento de células de distintas clases, que son las que permiten a ésta optimizar su potencial. Recíprocamente ésta es la que con su buen funcionamiento facilita a su alrededor que el sistema prosiga reproduciéndose con estabilidad. Nuestras especiales facultades no deberían pervertirse con la desconsideración hacia otras especies vivas, extinguiéndolas o 'humanizándolas', pues son éstas las que despiertan en nuestro cuerpo el saber instintivo y vegetativo sobre el que nuestra cognición debe asentarse para poder navegar hacia su plenitud. La perversión del sistema, o enfermedad, se evidencia cuando destruimos a nuestro alrededor las manifestaciones naturales de la vida que nos protegen psíquicamente del adormecimiento mental, del cual se aprovechan los mandatarios para infundirnos esta falsa seguridad institucional que llevó al pobre desgraciado a creer que podía fotografiar al animal salvaje 'respetuoso' con los turistas que han hecho el costoso viaje hasta ahí.Not long ago, I read shocked that a person died devoured by a lion in front of their family, who watched the show terrified in the same car that the person had abandoned for photographing the animal. This folly is not very common phenomenon among visitors to the reserve, but I think to some degree the general disconnect between human beings and the biological environment in which it has evolved, has made him lose an instinctive knowledge whose vacuum has been filled for a stupid paternalistic view toward nature. Even on television documentaries about animals must be mounted describing a small argument with happy fate for the animal, which does not hurt the moral well-being of the viewer. W_deleonesyhombres Invites reflection this little identification between man and nature. In Girona, someone who suffered severe indigestion denounced the council for letting grow into a public park inedible mushrooms. The council of City Hall had to eradicate its parks this mushrooms. The deliberate domestication of nature by humans, hides that integrate an organic system in which the proper functioning of your cells corresponds to the proper functioning of cells of different types, which are those that allow it to optimize its potential. Reciprocally with their efficient operation, facilitates around the system continues playing with stability. Our special faculties should not be perverted with disregard the other species, extinguishing or humanizing species, because they are the responsible of awaken in our body the knowledge of our instinctive and vegetative body, the place where our cognition needs settle to sail to fullness. The perversion of the system, or disease, is evident when we destroy around our natural manifestations of life that protect us psychically mental numbness, which the rulers exploit to infuse this false institutional security that led to the unfortunate man to believe that he could photograph the wild animal 'friendly' with tourists who have made the expensive trip up there." ["post_title"]=> string(71) "De leones y hombresOf lions and men" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(16) "of-lions-and-men" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2020-02-19 00:01:54" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2020-02-18 23:01:54" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(29) "http://whatonline.org/?p=6973" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" } [1]=> object(WP_Post)#1635 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(9091) ["post_author"]=> string(4) "2054" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2021-03-13 01:14:52" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2021-03-13 00:14:52" ["post_content"]=> string(12090) "

Whilst carbon dioxide levels are the highest they have been in human history, trust in institutional regimes to solve this global issue is at the lowest. Recent climate change models have warned that an increase of 1.5°C may already result by 2030. Solving the problem simply through mitigation strategies —changing habits, adopting renewable energy, etc— seems infeasible; we probably need stronger interventions.

Scientists started to investigate other means, besides mitigation approaches, to stabilize the climate and stay within the 2°C. Two solutions gained much attention: the production of bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and sulphate aerosol geoengineering (SAG). Should we favor one of the two? It might help to answer this question first: would you be the slave of a nice slave-owner?

BECCS diagram —Image PNA

Firstly, we need a basic understanding of the technologies. BECCS combines carbon capture and storage technology with an electric plant fuelled with biomass, including crops and forests; biomass is both used to absorb carbon and replace the use of fossil fuels. In particular, this approach allows the reuse of the land where the biomass is grown and the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere as long as the biomass is harvested sustainably. The captured CO2 can be stored under the soil, for instance in the deep ocean.

SAG diagram —Image China Dialogue

SAG, on the other hand, works by introducing sulphate in the atmosphere. These injections will reflect a part of the radiation coming from the sun back to space and counterbalance the warming influence of greenhouse gasses (GHG). This approach mimics the effects of volcanic eruptions whose fine dust and sulphuric droplets help cooling the planet. Sulfate aerosol could be delivered by high-altitude balloons, artillery guns, high-level aircraft, tall towers, or space elevators. The cost of this technology is very limited compared to mitigation approaches and the results could be seen in a matter of decades. At first glance these technologies look promising, but a closer look shows their shortcomings.

Both technologies could cause enormous damage to humans and the environment in case they would not work. BECCS could lead to food and freshwater shortages since it will use portions of the land devoted to agriculture. SAG might disrupt precipitation patterns. Therefore, a great deal of discussion has accompanied the emergence of these technologies. Most of the concerns around these technologies focus upon implementation and technical issues: Many scientists judge these technologies morally impermissible due to the detrimental consequences that can derive from them. These judgments are important, but they might neglect an even more important aspect of the story.

Is technology neutral?

In this article, I want to assume that these technical and implementation issues had been solved and ask whether there is an inherent feature of the technology itself that should lead policymakers to prefer the adaption of either SAG or BEECS. Simply, if there were no issues with these technologies, is there some intrinsic aspect of the technology itself that should make us favor one over the other?

First of all, we need to understand how some aspects of technology could lead us to choose one over the other. Technology, differently from what you might believe is not neutral. In fact, certain technologies, in virtue of their design, uphold certain values. Technology can hold a specific value if, in its widespread usages, it tends to promote rather than violate that value. For instance, a gas-engine car can be used in many ways, but its central uses remain transportation. Consequently, when a gas-engine car is utilized certain consequences —for instance pollution— occur, which promotes or deters certain values —i.e. sustainability—. Every technology, thus, has certain embedded consequences manifested in their central uses. Apart from economic values, technology can systematically promote or deter cultural and moral values —democracy, justice, cultural practices, etc—. Does SAG or BECCS uphold or deter certain specific value due to their specific design/implementation mechanisms?

This image shows which part of the world is warmed the most by human action —Image NASA

The capacity to yield power

Under the assumption that both SAG and BECCS work fine, the latter is praised for its capacity to capture carbon and store it under the terrain with the possibility of reusing the captured carbon. On the other hand, SAG does not allow to capture CO2 from the air but only reflect solar radiation. Once SAG is employed the process should be continuous and accompanied by mitigation strategies. Halting the process of injection will lead to sudden warming of the climate, known as the 'termination shock'. We cannot see SAG as a one-off strategy but rather as a temporally extended process. SAG imposes its long-term adaption. In this sense, it can be said that SAG has an inherent tendency to be dominating.

When we use the word domination, we generally refer to its descriptive meaning: someone who dominates someone else. Domination can have a normative meaning. In this sense, domination is not simply associated with superior power but rather with the capacity to exercise one’s superior power without any external constraints. To put it simply, a slave-owner, no matter how nice he treats his slaves remains still a slave-owner. The slaves have to live with the fear that one day he might change his mind and has the capacity to threaten them. With this meaning, domination inevitably clashes with the concept of freedom: the ability to choose one’s path. Specifically, how and towards who is SAG more dominating than BEECS in virtue of its design?

The subjects of domination

Firstly, SAG is dominating towards future generations. It is normal that humans dominate future generations since they are not present yet. SAG, however, increases the magnitude of current domination over future generations because its deployment will inevitably impact the entire globe. Furthermore, SAG changes the nature of this domination. SAG makes it possible for the current generation to escape external checks on their power over future generations. Whilst the deployment of BECCS is constrained by the fact that its implementation will forcedly harm the interests of the present generations, for instance by driving the price of food up or diminishing reserves of freshwater, the deployment of SAG will just benefit the current generation by lowering global temperatures. SAG, thus, lacks any intra-generational checks. Finally, SAG results inherently dominating toward future generations since it forces them in a specific direction. As we have said, in contrast to BECCS, SAG does not eliminate GHG from the atmosphere, it simply halts the process. This, thereby, imposes future generations to comply with the technology. But SAG is not only more dominating than BECCS towards future generations.

SAG, indeed, is even more dominating towards the natural environment and non-human species than BECCS. The implementation of SAG does not meet external constraints since, up to now, there is no evidence that there is an upper limit of sulphate that can be injected in the atmosphere. On the other hand, nature presents clear limits on where the biomass can be cultivated; besides, carbon can be stored safely only in particular conditions. Similar to the case of intergenerational domination, SAG does not seem to have external checks and thus it enlarges the scope of domination over the natural environment —we have to remember that domination is not simply associated with complete control but the capacity to yield greater power—. This, in turn, could raise the bar of artificial solutions humans can adopt to shape the environment. Furthermore, as we have seen, SAG cannot be a single-shot strategy but has to perennially maintained. This means that SAG would expand the timeframe of domination over nature.

It is clear that we are warming the planet. Can we do something to avoid it? The answer is yes, of course, we can —Image Unknown Author

Ye shall not dominate

As we have seen certain technologies hold specific political, cultural, and/or moral values that make it clear that once chosen certain consequences will be more likely to happen. Certain technologies, specifically, might change the way we see the world and/or change our cultural practices. For instance, when using the gas-fueled car we experience the world in a different way than when we walk or use the bike; we see the world proceeding fast. Seemingly, technologies can change our relationship with the environment. When trying to solve climate change, choosing among the current designs of SAG and BECCS may signify choosing a particular relationship we want to have with the natural world. Still, this does not mean that the current design of SAG must be a definite one. In considering future designs, however, we must be aware that specific designs embody different values, and that satisfying all of them at the same time is not feasible. When designing we inevitably make trade-offs between the values we find most important. In order to make an accurate choice, we must make sure that the value of non-domination enters into the dialogue; because no one wants to be a slave, of not even a nice slave owner.

" ["post_title"]=> string(104) "Governing (dominating) the climateGoverning (dominating) the climate" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(153) "Whilst carbon dioxide levels are the highest they have been in human history, trust in institutional regimes to solve this global issue is at the lowest." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(32) "governing-dominating-the-climate" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2021-05-06 17:50:32" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2021-05-06 15:50:32" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "http://whatamagazine.com/?p=9091" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" } [2]=> object(WP_Post)#1639 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(5450) ["post_author"]=> string(4) "2049" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2013-12-09 00:01:29" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2013-12-08 23:01:29" ["post_content"]=> string(1521) "Esta no es una historia sobre la desaparición de los humanos, sino sobre lo que podría suceder en la Tierra si eso pasa. No se ocupa de cómo nos extinguimos, simplemente ya no estamos y todo queda tal cual lo dejamos, sin catástrofes ni acontecimientos traumáticos de ningún tipo. Los televisores permanecen encendidos, funcionan los relojes, las tiendas están llenas de cosas… pero no hay humanos y las cosas empiezan a cambiar rápidamente. 'La vida sin nosotros' es un documental realizado por el equipo de History Channel en el año 2009, en el que se predice qué ocurriría en el futuro si ya no estuviésemos en el planeta, basado en hipótesis de científicos especializados en diferentes áreas como ingeniería, botánica, arqueología, geología o climatología.This is not the story about how humans we could disappear, but rather what would happen on Earth after our demise. It does not deal how we extinguish, simply we are not anymore and all leave it as it is, with no evidence of traumatic events or disasters of any kind. The televisions are on, the clocks work, the shops are full of things... but there are not humans and things start to change quickly. 'Life after people' is a documentary made by the History Channel team in 2009 in which is predicted what would happen in the future if we were no longer on the planet, based on hypotheses of scientists specializing in different fields like engineering, botany, archeology, geology or climatology." ["post_title"]=> string(73) "La vida sin nosotrosLife after people" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(17) "life-after-people" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2020-02-19 00:39:09" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2020-02-18 23:39:09" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(29) "http://whatonline.org/?p=5450" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" } [3]=> object(WP_Post)#1792 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(1279) ["post_author"]=> string(4) "2049" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2012-05-18 00:04:48" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2012-05-17 22:04:48" ["post_content"]=> string(3736) "Todas las teorías científicas vigentes, confirmadas recientemente en la reunión de la American Astronomical Society en Texas en enero de 2012, sostienen que la mayor parte del Universo está formado por energía oscura, cuyo descubrimiento sorprendió a los científicos hace algo más de una década y al que escribe hace algo más de un año. Este tipo de energía de sugerente nombre está presente en todo el espacio y produce una presión que supone una fuerza de repulsión por la cual la expansión del Universo a partir del Big Bang no se ralentiza con el tiempo, que parecería lo lógico, sino que se acelera. W_energiaoscura
Imagen compuesta del cúmulo de galaxias CL0024+17, tomada por el telescopio espacial Hubble, que muestra la creación de un efecto de lente gravitacional supuestamente debido, en gran parte, a la interacción gravitatoria con la materia oscura —Imagen NASA
A pesar de que comparten adjetivo, no hay que confundirla con la materia oscura. En astrofísica se denomina así a la hipotética materia que no emite suficiente radiación electromagnética como para ser detectada con los medios técnicos actuales, pero cuya existencia se puede deducir a partir de los efectos que causa en la materia que sí es detectable, como las estrellas o las galaxias. Los cálculos más detallados, realizados por la NASA con el satélite WMAP, indican que el 72% de todo lo que existe es energía oscura, el 23% es materia oscura y solamente el 5% es materia corriente, de la que conocemos, formada por protones y neutrones.According to all current scientific theories, recently confirmed by the American Astronomical Society reunion in Texas in January 2012, the vast majority of the Universe is formed by dark energy, whose discovery surprised the scientific community a decade ago. This mysterious type of energy, with a suggestive name, is present in the whole space and produces a pressure that generates a repulsive force by which the Universe’s expansion, after the Bing Bang, is not slowed down, which would seem logical, but it accelerates. W_energiaoscura
Composite image of the galaxy cluster CL0024+17, taken by the Hubble space telescope, that shows the creation of a gravitational lensing effect supposedly due, in large part, to the gravitational interaction with dark matter —Image NASA
Even though they share the adjective, it should not be confused with the dark matter. In astrophysics, this is how it is called the hypothetical matter that does not emit enough electromagnetic radiation to be detected with current technical means, but whose existence can be inferred from the effects it has on ordinary or visible matter, such as stars or galaxies. The most precise calculations, made by the WMAP satellite, show that 72% of all that exists is dark energy, 23% is dark matter while only a 5% is ordinary matter, from what we currently know, formed by protons and neutrons." ["post_title"]=> string(75) "No somos casi nadaWe are almost nothing" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(21) "we-are-almost-nothing" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2020-03-09 16:50:28" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2020-03-09 15:50:28" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(29) "http://whatonline.org/?p=1279" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" } }