![\"\"](\"https:\/\/olduvai.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/cognitive-dissonance.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nIf you\u2019re new to my writing, check out <\/b>this overview<\/b><\/a>.<\/b><\/p>\n In Part 1 of this Contemplation (<\/span>Website<\/span><\/a> Medium<\/span><\/a> Substack<\/span><\/a>) <\/span>I discuss how our species seems to be responding to the signals our planet and society are sending as they become increasingly\u00a0 stressed. This strain, I argue, is a result of humanity\u2019s ever-present problem-solving behaviour that not only increases complexity but consumes huge amounts of resources while creating significant quantities of waste that is overloading compensatory sinks.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n This particular approach to \u2018solving\u2019 problems has helped to lead humanity past the natural carrying capacity of our planet and into the predicament of <\/span>ecological overshoot<\/span><\/a>. Research suggests that we have, in fact, surpassed a number of planetary boundaries in our drive to \u2018solve\u2019 most of the issues we encounter in our survival quest.<\/span><\/p>\n Because of our overshoot and the environmental and societal stressors it is resulting in, we\u00a0 <\/span>highly emotional beings<\/span><\/a> have managed the anxiety that accompanies the sense of loss and change that the consequences of overshoot bring in a variety of ways. As <\/span>story-tellers<\/span><\/a> and <\/span>tool-makers<\/span><\/a>, humans have created tales and technologies to help in our pain avoidance and aid in our survival. [Note: while the ways in which Homo sapiens address this pain-avoidance\/pleasure-seeking behaviour are unique, the basic behavioural response is not (aka <\/span>Thorndike\u2019s Law of Effect<\/span><\/a>\u2013while not a \u2018hard and fast\u2019 law\u2013does seem to help explain a lot of animal behaviour).]<\/span><\/p>\n As a result of all this, a growing number of people seem to be attempting to negotiate their way out of our various predicaments in order to reduce their anxiety\/pain. And many have done\/are doing this by placing their faith in quick techno-fix \u2018solutions\u2019. Many of these \u2018solutions\u2019, however, are neither sustainable nor even actually being produced (they\u2019re conceptual\/theoretical in nature); and their pursuit is and will continue to exacerbate the \u2018problems\u2019 they are being called upon to \u2018solve\u2019.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n As our unsustainable, global-industrial society continues its journey towards \u2018collapse\u2019 and the tension grows between our propensity to expand (both on a population and economic level) and the ecological systems of our planet, we should expect the psychological defense mechanisms most humans are employing to minimise the stress to become more pronounced (as<\/span> Kevin Hester<\/span><\/a> suggested in a comment on Part 1, \u201cthe perfect storm of non-linear change and exponential cognitive dissonance\u201d. Concomitantly, we are increasingly likely to experience a doubling-\/tripling-down of this rush to find quick solutions by way of our dominant adaptive behaviour: pursuing technologies. And it doesn\u2019t help that the world\u2019s profiteers are pushing the industrial products they help to manufacture and sell as humanity\u2019s salvation.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n That is what this Contemplation discusses.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n You Got A Problem? We Got A Solution!<\/b><\/p>\n As problem-solving organisations society begins to search for \u2018solutions\u2019 when \u2018problems\/stressors\u2019 arise. Typically it zeroes in on the easiest-, quickest-, and least-expensive-to-implement. But just as important as actual actions and policies to address issues is the narrative management that is employed to convince the masses that not only are things being done to address \u2018problems\u2019 (so as not to stoke dissatisfaction with the status quo) but that the future is bright and things are getting better because, for example, governing institutions and\/or the \u2018free market\u2019 work marvellously.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n However, faith in the status quo institutions and arrangements can wane, and humanity\u2019s repeated experiments in large, complex societies has shown this again and again.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n It would appear that throughout pre\/history one approach to this faltering support of society has been to abandon the failing\/collapsing systems, especially once the \u2018costs\u2019 shouldered by participants outweigh the \u2018benefits\u2019 accrued. Families\/communities appear to break away from the society in question, as observed in the demographic data via archaeological digs\u2013for example, the largest \u2018markers\u2019 of complex societies (i.e., urban centres) display significant population decline just prior to or during the time a society begins to show signs of failing\/simplifying institutions (especially sociopolitical ones).<\/span><\/p>\n In fact, today\u2019s seemingly significant increase in concern for\/awareness of societal collapse, according to archaeologist <\/span>Joseph Tainter<\/span><\/a>, is an indicator of rising stress with evermore individuals and groups turning to alternative systems of living. <\/span>Ecovillages<\/span><\/a>. <\/span>Permaculture<\/span><\/a>. <\/span>Regenerature agriculture<\/span><\/a>. <\/span>Transition towns<\/span><\/a>. Pursuing a movement away from modernity\u2019s complex arrangements and living more simply and, ideally, sustainably is therefore a possible response to the expansion of societal and ecological stressors.<\/span><\/p>\n Another approach, on a sociopolitical level, is that the societal \u2018leaders\u2019 and its various institutions may attempt to unify members and pursue collective action. This is mostly embarked upon via rhetoric and narrative management but can, of course, lead to more \u2018forceful\u2019 forms of societal \u2018unification\u2019, especially when narrative control is lost.<\/span><\/p>\n Typical in this approach of collective action is the leveraging of perceived crises (oftentimes overblown and\/or created) to justify policy changes\u2013changes that oftentimes aim to advance favoured agendas that serve to enrich the ruling class. This approach tends to be \u2018successful\u2019 since <\/span>fear is perhaps our strongest emotion<\/span><\/a> and reducing\/eliminating it is highly motivating.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n And with our species\u2019 tendency to <\/span>defer to authority<\/span><\/a>, if our \u2018leaders\u2019 offer a \u2018solution\u2019 to a substantive \u2018problem\u2019, the masses lean heavily towards accepting and supporting it (see <\/span>this<\/span><\/a>). It is no surprise that this approach is often used by the ruling elite given what I have argued several times in previous writings is their primary motivation: the continued control and maintenance\/expansion of their revenue streams and the power and prestige that comes with this.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Apart from \u2018walking away\u2019 from a \u2018collapsing\u2019 society or pursuing \u2018collective action\u2019, the most common approaches that are employed by a society\u2019s attempts to adapt to changing conditions gravitate towards resource allocation, technological innovation, and societal flexibility. Drawing upon experience and past crises, societies often employ strategies that have worked previously; technological innovation being the most common one.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The approach of technological innovation has been with Homo sapiens since soon after our species arrived on the planet. From the <\/span>harnessing of fire by our early ancestors<\/span><\/a> to the recent pursuit of <\/span>fusion-energy reactors<\/span><\/a>, humans have turned to technology of one kind or another to help us adapt to our surroundings. So, it\u2019s no surprise that this pathway is the one the overwhelming majority of people support and advocate for. Human ingenuity and our technological inventions will always \u2018save the day\u2019. And we seem to be doubling-\/tripling-down on this particular strategy, perhaps because of the perceived endless \u2018success\u2019 it has led to.<\/span><\/p>\n But as the investment advice disclaimer goes: \u201cPast success does not guarantee future results.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Technology: It\u2019s Both a Blessing and a Curse (only we often ignore the cursed part)<\/b><\/p>\n Where better to look for and pursue short-term \u2018fixes\u2019 than in our technology. That long-appreciated ability of our ingenious species to imagine and fashion tools to aid in our survival and the taming of Nature\u2019s unpredictability.<\/span><\/p>\n Problem with the climate? Let\u2019s begin <\/span>geoengineering<\/span><\/a> the atmosphere <\/span>and<\/span> carbon capture and storage<\/span><\/a> of that pesky greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. Loss of pollinators? Let\u2019s create<\/span> mechanical insects<\/span><\/a>. Running out of hydrocarbons to sustain the unsustainable? Let\u2019s pursue<\/span> non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies<\/span><\/a>. Not enough fresh water on the planet? We will simply <\/span>desalinate<\/span><\/a> the oceans. Pests and disease reducing our food harvests? <\/span>Genetic modification<\/span><\/a> of plants and the creation of powerfu<\/span>l <\/span>pesticides<\/span><\/a> and<\/span> fertilisers<\/span><\/a> is the answer. Need to increase our productivity? How about <\/span>robotic assembly lines<\/span><\/a> and <\/span>artificial intelligence<\/span><\/a>? Having difficulty predicting the future? No problem, we\u2019ll design complex <\/span>scientific models<\/span><\/a> to pin it down.<\/span><\/p>\n You got a problem? We\u2019ve got a technological solution to address it!<\/span><\/p>\n What most tend not to do in our quest for reducing our anxiety is consider the potential negative consequences of our \u2018solutions\u2019, especially as they pertain to our technologies. This creates a strong but false sense of security, believing we can \u2018solve\u2019 issues without changing the underlying causes. We also very much ignore the ecological consequences of these technologies; or layer even more bargaining on top by creating stories about circular economies, and\/or \u2018clean and sustainable\u2019 extraction, processing, production, and\/or reclamation\/disposal.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n A handful of my Contemplations that examine how\/why our technologies are not \u2018solutions\u2019 to our \u2018problems\u2019: Most humans very much discount the longer-term risks to take advantage of the shorter-term benefits. So what if we are introducing greater complexity, dependency, and inequality. Human ingenuity and our technological prowess will take care of these things so that everyone can live in a utopian paradise, eventually. We just need to invest in our technologies at a breakneck rate (it\u2019s not a coincidence that this narrative is pushed by those profitting from it, both at a political and corporate\/business level). It\u2019s looking more and more like a deal with the devil, however.<\/span><\/p>\n All of this\u2013particularly our pursuit of quick technological fixes\u2013is leading to the adoption of maladaptive strategies that are failing (except through greater bargaining) to consider and address the fundamental issues that are creating societal and environmental stressors. This is resulting in an exacerbation of the very predicaments the \u2018solutions\u2019 are attempting to \u2018fix\u2019. We are, in essence, speeding up our journey along the Seneca Cliff.<\/span><\/p>\n To sum up this dilemma with technological innovation being humanity\u2019s go-to problem-solving response: with its tendency towards short-term \u2018solutions\u2019, our species is ignoring the longer-term consequences of virtually all of our technologies. This has become particularly problematic over the past century or more, when we have pursued mass-produced, industrial-based ones that require significantly destructive extraction and refining of finite materials. And while we continue to engage in these ad hoc problem-solving behaviours, we are also overlooking various other impacts which include: troublesome changes in social dynamics; destructive unintended consequences (especially upon ecological systems); creation of complacency; compounding of negative repercussions; and, adverse nonlinear feedback. Our over-reliance on these technologies is exacerbating the very issues we are attempting to address.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/a>CLICK HERE<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/a><\/span>(\u200b\u200b<\/span>https:\/\/www.stockholmresilience.org\/research\/planetary-boundaries.html<\/span><\/a>)\u00a0<\/span><\/h5>\n<\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nsofararchon.com<\/span><\/a><\/h5>\n
\n
\n
\n<\/span>\u2018Renewable\u2019 Energy: See, Hear, and Speak No Evil<\/b>,<\/span> Part 1<\/b>,<\/span> Website<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Medium<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Substack<\/b><\/a> Part 2, <\/b>Website<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Medium<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Substack<\/b><\/a> Part 3<\/b>,<\/span> Website<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Medium<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Substack<\/b><\/a>
\nSorry, folks, but \u2018renewables\u2019 are NOT going to save humanity or the planet<\/b>,<\/span> Website<\/b><\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Medium<\/b><\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Substack<\/b><\/a>
\n<\/b>Tech \u2018Solutions\u2019 Are Us<\/b>,<\/span> Website<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Medium<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Substack<\/b><\/a>
\n\u2018Renewables\u2019: The Great \u2018Solution\u2019 (NOT)<\/b>,<\/span> Website<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Medium<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Substack<\/b><\/a>
\nTo EV Or Not To EV? One Of Many Questions Regarding Our \u2018Clean\/Green\u2019 Utopian Future, Part 1<\/b>,<\/span> Website<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Medium<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Substack<\/b><\/a> Part 2<\/b>,<\/span> Website<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Medium<\/b><\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/b>Substack<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/a>In essence, we are placing very leaky bandages (peppered with bacteria and viruses) over gaping wounds and telling ourselves everything is fine.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nshutterstock.com<\/span><\/a>\u00a0<\/span><\/h5>\n