generalmandrake t1_j4zut8a wrote
Reply to comment by WhatsTheHoldup in Steven Pinker on the power of irrationality | Choosing ignorance, incapacity, or irrationality can at times be the most rational thing to do. by IAI_Admin
I think climate change is more of an individual vs the collective thing. Collectively barreling towards major climate change is suicidal, institutions like governments are especially at risk because major turmoil historically normally involves the collapse of regimes.
Individually the story is different. From a purely individualistic perspective the contemporary benefits of fossil fuels can outweigh costs that won’t be borne until after you are dead. Even when you consider things like genetic legacy, the economic wealth you accumulate from fossil fuels could actually put your descendants at an advantage in the future world, their survival may actually be improved. Also, there is a free rider problem as well, no one individual is the deciding factor in how much emissions we emit and how severe climate change will be. The lifetime CO2 output of a given person is marginal. If voluntarily economically hamstringing yourself and your family is not going to make a difference as far as the existential threats of climate change goes then it really is not rational to take that course of action.
DrumstickTruffleclub t1_j59h81x wrote
I agree it is a collective problem. But I feel guilty if I don't try to limit my emissions (reasonably, because I AM contributing to the problem) and so it's rational in a way to try to limit that feeling by acting to conserve energy. But there are situations where I feel the benefit to me of doing something (e.g. I would suffer health consequences and significant discomfort if I never turned the heating on in winter) outweighs the guilt. I guess everyone's calculation is different, depending on their circumstances and conditioning.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments