The
die is cast and I have lost interest in looking at every article
where the mainstream is playing catch-up and am only making an
exception for this because it comes from an Australian publication.
I
will, by-and- large be restricting myself to chronicling the changes
to climate and weather and covering stories that really are news
Many
fear the worst for humanity, so how do we avoid surrendering to an
apocalyptic fate?
12
October, 2015
A
new, four-nation study has found people rate the risks of global
threats to humanity surprisingly high. These perceptions are likely
to be important, socially and politically, in shaping how humanity
responds to the threats.
- 54% of people surveyed rated the risk of our way of life ending within the next 100 years at 50% or greater;
- almost one in four (24%) rated the risk of humans being wiped out within a century at 50% or greater;
- almost three in four (73%) believe there is a 30% or greater risk of our way of life ending (30% said that the risk is 70% or more); and
- almost four in ten (39%) believe there is a 30% or greater danger of humanity being wiped out (10% said the risk is 70% or more).
Perceptions
of risks to way of life and humanity by country
Percentage
support for propositions that existing way of life and humanity have
a 50% or more chance of ending in a century. University
of Wollongong, Author
provided
The
study also asked people about different responses to the threats.
These responses were categorised as nihilism (the loss of belief in a
social or moral order; decadence rules), fundamentalism (the retreat
to certain belief; dogma rules), or activism (the transformation of
belief; hope rules). It found:
- a large majority (78%) agreed “we need to transform our worldview and way of life if we are to create a better future for the world” (activism);
- about one in two (48%) agreed that “the world’s future looks grim so we have to focus on looking after ourselves and those we love” (nihilism); and
- more than one in three (36%) said “we are facing a final conflict between good and evil in the world” (fundamentalism).
Findings
were similar across countries, age, sex and other demographic groups,
although some interesting differences emerged. For example, more
Americans (30%) believed the risk of humans being wiped out was high
and that humanity faces a final conflict between good and evil (47%).
This presumably reflects the strength in the US of Christian
fundamentalism and its belief in the “end time”, a coming
Apocalypse.
Perceptions
of risk to way of life and humanity by generation
Percentage
support for propositions that existing way of life and humanity have
a 50% or more chance of ending in a century. University
of Wollongong, Author
provided
A world of threats coming to a head
There
is mounting scientific evidence and concern that humanity faces a
defining moment in history – a time when it must address growing
adversities or suffer grave consequences. Reputable journals are
canvassing the possibilities; the new study will be published in a
special issue of Futures on “Confronting
catastrophic threats to humanity”.
Most
focus today is on climate change and its many, potentially
catastrophic, impacts. Other threats include depletion and
degradation of natural resources and ecosystems; continuing world
population growth; disease pandemics; global economic collapse;
nuclear and biological war and terrorism; and runaway technological
change.
Many
of these threats are not new. Scientists and other experts have
warned of the dangers for decades. Nevertheless, the evidence is
growing stronger, especially about climate change, and never before
have actual events, including natural disasters and calamities, and
their sustained and graphic media coverage so powerfully reinforced
the possible impacts.
Not
surprisingly, then, surveys reveal widespread public pessimism about
the future of the world, at least in Western countries. This includes
a common perception of declining quality of life, or that future
generations will be worse off.
However,
there appears to have been little research into people’s
perceptions of how dire humanity’s predicament is, including the
risk of collapse of civilisation or human extinction. These
perceptions have a significant bearing on how societies, and humanity
as a whole, deal with potentially catastrophic futures.
How does loss of faith in the future affect us?
People’s
responses in our study do not necessarily represent considered
assessments of the specific risks. Rather, they are likely to be an
expression of a more general uncertainty and fear, a loss of faith in
a future constructed around notions of material progress, economic
growth and scientific and technological fixes to the challenges we
face.
This
loss of faith is important, yet hardly registers in current debate
and discussion. We have yet to understand its full implications.
At
best, the high perception of risk and the strong endorsement of an
activist response could drive a much greater effort to confront
global threats. At worst, with a loss of hope, fear of a catastrophic
future erodes people’s faith in society, affecting their roles and
responsibilities, and their relationship to social institutions,
especially government.
It
can deny us a social ideal to believe in – something to convince us
to subordinate our own individual interests to a higher social
purpose.
There
is a deeply mythic dimension to this situation. Humans have always
been susceptible to apocalyptic visions, especially in times of rapid
change; we need utopian ideals to inspire us.
Our
visions of the future are woven into the stories we create to make
sense and meaning of our lives, to link us to a broader social or
collective narrative. Historians and futurists have emphasised the
importance of confidence and optimism to the health of civilisations
and, conversely, the dangers of cynicism and disillusion.
Despite
increasing political action on specific issues like climate change,
globally the scale of our response falls far short of matching the
magnitude of the threats. Closing this gap requires a deeper
understanding of how people perceive the risks and how they might
respond.
who, exactly, are the people asked? random folks on the street or?
ReplyDelete