Skip to main content

Cause for Hope, Cause for Concern

Yesterday I came across a commercial for Unilever's Project Sunlight entitled "Why bring a child into this world?" Usually I skip right over these ads to get to the content I've actually come to watch, but I was curious enough to watch it through to the end. It is an interesting and important question that, in an ideal world, every couple or individual should give serious, reasoned thought to before having a child. I suspect that for many there is little thought given to it; either it is accidental or the attitude is taken that having children is just what people do. Given the world we live in and the future we face, the question needs more thought given to it than that.  The ad, however, is overwhelmingly positive, citing more food being grown, clean water, diseases cured and long lifespans for much of humanity. Take a look for yourself:


There is something that deeply bothers me about this, beyond even the glossy propaganda that tells couples "The future is bright--have a child." While they pay momentary lip service to the problems of the world, it is quickly smoothed over as they show pictures of happy children getting clean water, proud and industrious agricultural workers harvesting fruit with care, and this over-optimism is I think what bothers me the most.

I should like to be more optimistic for our future on this planet than I am, but my optimism is tempered by the knowledge of the very real problems that we face. Beyond the usual fears of war and its associated destruction, we have a myriad of problems all waiting to be dealt with. Or perhaps I shouldn't say that our problems are waiting to be dealt with--they aren't waiting in the slightest. Climate change is already here, already magnifying the naturally destructive forces of nature. Scientists are certain beyond any reasonable doubt that climate change is real, it is happening, that it is caused by human emissions of carbon dioxide through the burning of fossil fuels, and that it will pose great challenges for us in the future. And yet we have done worse than nothing to halt it. Species vanish into extinction at an unprecedented rate as the climate warms and we clear ever-more land for agriculture, logging, and mining. Vital habitat is lost forever as we carve up every last wilderness with roads, dams and development, and we are so consumed by our immediate needs that we fail to give much through to a future beyond the next quarter, the next decade even.

Beyond the problems our biosphere, we refuse to face the fact that our use of fossil fuels for energy is not only damaging but unsustainable. We continue to ignore the limitations that basic geology places on resources, that there is a finite amount of coal, oil and natural gas in the earth that can be recovered. Instead, we fritter it away as though it will last forever. 

Beyond even planetary issues, we face massive corruption in government at levels I believe we haven't seen since the spoils system of the late 1800's was slowly dismantled. With the declaration of corporate personhood, and that money is equivalent to speech under the Constitution, we are seeing corporations more and more controlling our government, the government that was supposed to be for the people. 

Yes, there is certainly reason for optimism. We are indeed curing diseases that once were deadly. Science has diminished or eradicated a whole range of once-debilitating diseases, from smallpox and polio to measles and mumps. We are even seeing the beginning of the end of chicken pox (and thus shingles, down the road) and HPV. As a species, we have walked on the moon, scanned the depths of the ocean, and turned our gaze to the stars. Having made the leap from horse and buggy to satellites in less than a hundred years is truly remarkable, and I do believe we will continue to do amazing things, if we manage to avoid destroying ourselves.

I do not think that our future is without hope, but this has to be a measured, considered hope. It does no good to put our heads in the sand and pretend nothing is wrong, or to go about with a Pollyanna-ish optimism that everything will just work itself out. Optimism is fine, but not without being able to acknowledge the many problems we face. Only when we acknowledge they exist can we begin to find reasonable solutions to address them. Further, we must not give in to the temptations presented to us by various forms of irrationality, from supply-side economics to faddish anti-science ideas to a blind faith that technology will solve all of our problems. If we want to have even a fighting chance at successfully tackling our problems, we must scorn the twin devils of irrationality and baseless superstition. It is with science and reason that we will continue to progress as a species, not the reverse. If we do this, then I am optimistic about our chances, but to pretend that the future is bright and without problems is blithely ignorant and wrong. 

Comments

  1. You make some very valid and important points, but I must disagree with your assertion at the end. "It is with science and reason that we will continue to progress as a species." Science and reasons are great tools, but have no essential moral basis. You can very rationally destroy nature and end human kind and science would be the means to do it. It seems to me that your argument stem from the non-rational qualities of compassion and love of mankind.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Unanswerable Questions" for Evolution Part One

Creation Ministries International has launched a new initiative, which seems a lot like all the other creationists blitzkriegs before it. With the wonderfully creative tagline of "Question Evolution", CMI intends to challenge "evolutionists" and their "indoctrination" of high school students with the supposed dogma of evolution. They also aim to  cut the population of atheists by half , presumably by challenging the "faith" that every atheist (and only atheists, no "real Christians") is supposed to hold in Darwin's great idea. The main thrust of this is a tract with fifteen "unanswerable" questions for evolutionists. I'm done putting quotation marks around the word, evolutionists; from here on out I ask my readers to recognize that it is a creationist term that is about as silly as calling someone a general relativist (accepts general relativity) or germist (for accepting germ theory). Regardless, CMI seems just as i...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...

The Absurdity/Agony of War

Science writer Mary Roach is never one to shy away from parts of science that verge on the absurd, as anyone who has read any of her books surely knows. I'd read two of her previous books, and been enchanted enough by Roach's unique combination of endless curiosity and a wry sense of humor that I rushed to lay my hands on her newest book. Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War will not fail in living up to the expectations that fans of her work will bring. Those who have never read her before will be hard-pressed to put down a book that I finished in a few short days.  The real joy of reading something by Mary Roach is her talent for seeking out strange areas of science that a reader might never have known about. As an investigator, she answers questions you never knew you had. Her newest work   is no exception. We discover, for instance, how the military tests the ability of a fighter jet to survive a mid-air collision with a large bird--by firing a dead chicken...