ysabetwordsmith | Philosophical Questions: Remembered

You're viewing

ysabetwordsmith's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

People have expressed interest in deep topics, so this list focuses on philosophical questions.

How long will you be remembered after you die?

That depends on whether it's personal memory (the remaining lifespan of people who knew me, so maybe 50 years or so) or my writing (which depends on its popularity, but could potentially be thousands of years).

Current Mood: busy

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

svnsettia

the way i see it, the problem with climate change isn't that we don't have enough knowledge on how bad it is, since most of us are well aware that it spells doom for most life on earth. it's mostly just bad politics and corporate greed. honestly, it'd be best if we set aside our thirst for knowledge for a minute and focused on protecting the ocean instead. even if we don't know much about what's going on there, we do know that pollution and climate change are royally fucking things up. all resources spent researching their effects on thermohaline cycles or hurricanes would be better spent on clean energy and disaster relief.

as for the safety of seafood, my first thought was that everybody should already be vegan anyways. my immediate second thought was to smack my past self with a roll of newspapers because that isn't feasible for everyone, especially not for islanders and those living on the coasts. i'm not sure if i'd categorize that as ocean exploration though--i'm more inclined to see it as health research. either way, i'm on your side on this one. it's very important to know about food safety and supply. health research is one of the things i think we really can't get enough of.

the seafloor is indeed crazy. i'm in my fourth year of university with a minor in geology and as far as anyone knows right now, earthquakes and tsunamis are pretty unpredictable. they have something to do with tectonics and a buildup of stress, but it's anyone's guess as to when that stress will be released and cause a disaster. it's a huge deal, and whoever figures it out first will be hailed a hero forever!

From:

ysabetwordsmith

>> the way i see it, the problem with climate change isn't that we don't have enough knowledge on how bad it is, since most of us are well aware that it spells doom for most life on earth.<<

If we don't know what problems are occurring and precisely why, then we can't prioritize responses or devise effective solutions. And the fact is, people don't know nearly as much about climate as they think they do. The models keep getting revised worse and worse as new information comes in.

>> it's mostly just bad politics and corporate greed.<<

That's true. There are very few areas where individuals can have a big impact. One of those? Reduce eating beef. Cows are terrible for the environment in many ways. If people stopped buying beef, then people who only raise it for the money would stop doing so.

>> honestly, it'd be best if we set aside our thirst for knowledge for a minute and focused on protecting the ocean instead. even if we don't know much about what's going on there, we do know that pollution and climate change are royally fucking things up.<<

We can't protect it effectively if we don't know about it. Which fisheries are sustainable and which are about to collapse? If we block fisheries unnecessarily, people reliant on them will go hungry -- especially poor countries. If we don't protect the ones most in danger, they will collapse. Which areas of the ocean are most critical to protect? We don't know that unless we have a pretty good idea not only what's in them but what it's doing there. Breeding grounds are the most important to protect, for instance.

With pollution, I agree. People shouldn't dump things in the oceans. But people are stupid and greedy, so they will keep doing that unless you can explain how it harms them. You need a ton of data for that.

>> all resources spent researching their effects on thermohaline cycles or hurricanes would be better spent on clean energy and disaster relief.<<

If the thermohaline belt breaks, the entire weatherworks will rearrange itself in ways that are really not conducive to human habitability. Hurricanes kill people. Things that kill people are motivating. Most of the stuff, they don't give a shit about. They do give a shit about things that might kill them. So those can be used to prod people to make useful changes.

Clean energy is good in theory, but only if it works out in practice. Does the benefit of solar energy outweigh the harm done by mining the rare materials to make them? And what will we do when those run low? Same for the batteries in electric cars. Now passive solar, that's a lot safer and more sustainable, but its uses are more limited. Hydropower? Is killing the rivers, the fish, and thus endangering both terrestrial and marine ecosystems. Without good information, we can't make good decisions about which actions are safer and more effective.

Disaster relief is running along after a problem trying to mop up the mess. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. We can't afford to keep rebuilding in areas prone to flooding and hurricanes; it's just a question of when people will give up. Some disaster relief is needed, but it can't solve the root problems.

>> as for the safety of seafood, my first thought was that everybody should already be vegan anyways. my immediate second thought was to smack my past self with a roll of newspapers because that isn't feasible for everyone, especially not for islanders and those living on the coasts.<<

Yep. Not everyone can thrive on a vegan diet. It's very difficult -- and usually expensive -- to get all of one's nutrients that way. Plus, seafood is the best source of many nutrients, for instance in oily fish. The best approaches I've seen include African, Mediterranean, and flexitarian diets. They all emphasize plants and use primarily fish and seafood, some poultry, and little if any red meat. If seafood is lost, many people would sicken or starve to death.

That said, vegetarian, vegan, and other plant-based diets do put less burden on the Earth and can be healthier than heavily meat-based diets. The western diet is just plain awful, but it is all that many people can get or afford. Come on, our government is so fucked up it subsidizes sugar but not apples or spinach, then tells people "half your plate should be vegetables." I'll consider that fair advice when half the subsidies go to vegetables.

>> i'm not sure if i'd categorize that as ocean exploration though--i'm more inclined to see it as health research. either way, i'm on your side on this one. it's very important to know about food safety and supply. health research is one of the things i think we really can't get enough of.<<

Depends on what people are looking at. Clam gardens are coming back on the west coast and a few other places. They attract tons of sealife. They also require maintenance, which means not just picking up the rocks knocked loose by wild weather, but also observing what is in there. Traditionally the elders would decide what to harvest, how much, and when -- based on their own observations or reports from the scouts. A different approach to science.

>>the seafloor is indeed crazy.<<

Have you explored the Cascadia Subduction Zone? That one has a pretty high chance of a full rip, because it's overdue; and enough other faults are overdue that it could chain down the whole west coast. Hence my thread about the Big One. It's only in the last few years that I've seen anyone other than me pointing out things like chain-reaction earthquakes or how high the death toll would be giving all the building in the kill zones. 0_o

>> i'm in my fourth year of university with a minor in geology <<

That's a fun topic. What's your major?

>> and as far as anyone knows right now, earthquakes and tsunamis are pretty unpredictable. they have something to do with tectonics and a buildup of stress, but it's anyone's guess as to when that stress will be released and cause a disaster. <<

Well, we know some things, like that faults often have a period -- a pattern of inactivity and activity that lets us roughly estimate when they are likely to shake loose. But we don't have a good warning system yet; we don't know enough for that. We know an underwater earthquake often causes a tsunami, and how fast it'll travel, so we do have warning systems for those. Unfortunately some places will only get 10-15 minutes of warning at most and that's not enough to clear the kill zones.

>> it's a huge deal, and whoever figures it out first will be hailed a hero forever! <<

True. That's Nobel science prize territory, and it'd be a lot faster than average because if your prediction system works, the first major quake will prove it and there's your major impact on society.