Investments to address climate change are good business

climate change
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

An internationally respected group of scientists have urgently called on world leaders to accelerate efforts to tackle climate change. Almost every aspect of the planet's environment and ecology is undergoing changes in response to climate change, some of which will be profound if not catastrophic in the future.

According to their study published in Science today, reducing the magnitude of climate change is also a good investment. Over the next few decades, acting to reduce climate change is expected to cost much less than the damage otherwise inflicted by climate change on people, infrastructure and ecosystems.

"Acting on climate change" said lead author, Prof Ove Hoegh-Guldberg from the ARC Centre for Excellence in Coral Reef Studies at the University of Queensland in Australia "has a good return on investment when one considers the damages avoided by acting."

The investment is even more compelling given the wealth of evidence that the are happening faster and more extensively than projected, even just a few years ago. This makes the case for rapidly reducing even more compelling and urgent.

Prof Hoegh-Guldberg explained the mismatch. "First, we have underestimated the sensitivity of natural and human systems to climate change, and the speed at which these changes are happening. Second, we have underappreciated the synergistic nature of climate threats—with the outcomes tending to be worse than the sum of the parts. This is resulting is rapid and comprehensive climate impacts, with growing damage to people, ecosystems, and livelihoods."

For example, sea-level rise can lead to higher water levels during storm events. This can create more damage. For deprived areas, this may exacerbate poverty creating further disadvantage. Each risk may be small on its own, but a small change in a number of risks can lead to large impacts.

Prof Daniela Jacob, co-author and Director of Climate Services Centre (GERICS) in Germany is concerned about these rapid changes—especially about unprecedented weather extremes.

"We are already in new territory" said Prof Jacob, "The 'novelty' of the weather is making our ability to forecast and respond to weather-related phenomena very difficult."

These changes are having major consequences. The paper updates a database of climate-related changes and finds that there are significant benefits from avoiding 2 C and aiming to restrict the increase to 1.5 C above pre-industrial global temperatures.

Prof Rachel Warren from the Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia in the UK assessed projections of risk for forests, biodiversity, food, crops and other critical systems, and found very significant benefits for limiting global warming to 1.5 C rather than 2 C.

"The scientific community has quantified these risks in order to inform about the benefits of avoiding them," Prof Warren stated.

Since the Paris Agreement came into force, there has been a race to quantify the benefits of limiting warming to 1.5 C so that policy makers have the best possible information for developing the policy required for doing it.

Prof Warren continued. "If such policy is not implemented, we will continue on the current upward trajectory of burning fossil fuels and continuing deforestation, which will expand the already large-scale degradation of ecosystems. To be honest, the overall picture is very grim unless we act."

A recent report from the United Nations projected that as many as a million species may be at risk of extinction over the coming decades and centuries. Climate change is not the only factor but is one of the most important ones.

The urgency of responding to climate change is at front of mind for Prof Michael Taylor, co-author and Dean of Science at the University of the West Indies. "This is not an academic issue, it is a matter of life and death for people everywhere. That said, people from small island States and low-lying countries are in the immediate cross-hairs of climate change."

"I am very concerned about the future for these people," said Professor Taylor.

This urgency to act is further emphasized by the vulnerability of developing countries to climate change impacts as pointed out by Francois Engelbrecht, co-author and Professor of Climatology at the Global Change Institute of the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa.

"The developing African countries are amongst those to be affected most in terms of impacts on economic growth in the absence of strong climate change mitigation," Prof Engelbrecht explains.

Prof Hoegh-Guldberg reiterated the importance of the coming year (2020) in terms of climate action and the opportunity to strengthen emission reduction pledges in line with the Paris Agreement of 2015.

"Current emission reduction commitments are inadequate and risk throwing many nations into chaos and harm, with a particular vulnerability of poor peoples. To avoid this, we must accelerate action and tighten emission reduction targets so that they fall in line with the Paris Agreement. As we show, this is much less costly than suffering the impacts of 2 C or more of climate change."

"Tackling change is a tall order. However, there is no alternative from the perspective of human well-being—and too much at stake not to act urgently on this issue."

'The human imperative of stabilizing global at 1.5°C' is published in Science on September 19.


Explore further

Climate crisis cannot be tackled without shift away from damaging land use, major report warns

More information: O. Hoegh-Guldberg at University of Queensland in St. Lucia, QLD, Australia el al., "The human imperative of stabilizing global climate change at 1.5°C," Science (2019). science.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi … 1126/science.aaw6974
Journal information: Science

Citation: Investments to address climate change are good business (2019, September 19) retrieved 19 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-09-investments-climate-good-business.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
240 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Sep 19, 2019
If Capitalists thought they were good investments, then Capitalists would be making the investments.

So why don't Capitalists think they are good investments, and if they are, how can the brain damage of these Capitalists be managed for the good of mankind rather than to it's detriment?

Sep 19, 2019
If Capitalists thought they were good investments, then Capitalists would be making the investments
But it's complex Vendi. Two 'Capitalists' can look at the exact same set of facts - and draw up very different plans. Maybe makes you think that Capitalism is not as rational as many would like to believe. Wheat farmers in Oklahoma - continue to grow wheat - even though it is very marginal in terms of economics. When asked why? They say that they don't know what else to do. "That's what Grandpa used to grow - and Pa - and so that is what I grow"
At some point - the 'Capitalists' will give up their legacy monopolies - that have served them so well for hundreds of years - and then they will claim that renewables - and electric cars - were their idea. Big question is - how bad does it have to get - before they suddenly find Jesus. Time will tell.

Sep 19, 2019
A weird thing happened: Michael Milken just said renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels for 2/3 of countries in the world. I'm not kidding; see for yourself: https://www.cnbc....ken.html

He don't give a shit about global warming. He's only interested in money. He's touting renewables for investment.

So now the liar deniers want us to spend extra money to support their fuelish bullshit. Probably their favorite stocks, or whoever is paying them. Fuck that noise. Invest in renewables every way you can. Get your money and screw the people fucking the planet and threatening a couple billion people with death to steal from us.

Sep 19, 2019
A sucker is born every minute - PT Barnum

Sep 19, 2019
Shell is doing it too. Yes that Shell. They moved 700,000 British power customers to renewables, gratis. For free.

https://www.cnbc....ity.html

Sorry, but I ain't buyin' that Shell, BP, and Michael Milken are the suckers. Looks like it's down to you, @shootie. I'd say you're shooting yourself in the foot and subsidizing the rich. Hope that works out for you, but I suspect you'll be whining for welfare. Being a tax burden because you were too stupid to work out which way the wind's blowing even after two of the richest companies on Earth walked away from your bullshit.

The smart money is leaving. You guys are fucked.

Sep 19, 2019
The edit removed the other half; Shell is also leaving a lobbying organization that supports loser liar deniers too: https://www.pri.o...e-change

You guys are so fucked.

@shootie, you're going to die eating dog food.

Sep 19, 2019
One of the nice things about being BP or Shell and going into renewables is you already have the gas stations to start converting into charging stations for electric vehicles. Watch it happen.

Sep 19, 2019
Fidelity now has stock and bond funds for renewables. Might wanna check it out if your 401(k) is at Fidelity.

Sep 19, 2019
shoots-own-foot will die from getting eaten by his own dogs

those yorkies are viciously ravenous beasts!

the error a;tright fairytails like shoofly constantly make?
is parroting politically correct, ideologically pure slogans as if those are facts

true conservatism is a;; anout eggiciency & self-discipline & getting the functions od society done correctly & honestly

does anyone believe these descriptives apply to shoo & the other quisling denierbots?

Sep 19, 2019
https://www.marke...nd/fslex

Up 46% over five years.

Go ahead, stupid money. Bet on the liar deniers. I got mine.

Sep 19, 2019
Let see... it goes:
1) Dump pollution on everyone --- Profit
2) Clean up pollution --- Profit
3) Waste a lot of time --- Profit
4) ... we all become soylent green --- ???

Sep 19, 2019
4) ... we all become soylent green --- ???


Things are better than ever before in human history. You are TRULY delusional.
See Harvard's Dr. Steven Pinker's work.

Sep 20, 2019
If we kill all the rest of the animals on Earth, what are we gonna eat?

Sounds like Soylent Green to me. That's the Malthusian solution.

Sep 20, 2019
I don't need scientist to tell me what a good investment. Just look at the stock markets and companies pushing environmental solutions.

Sep 20, 2019
@greenonions1
Maybe makes you think that Capitalism is not as rational as many would like to believe


Stop conflating business with capitalism; they're not the same thing. Capitalism is the political system from the philosophy of Individualism, and the free market is the economic system that capitalism makes possible. Just because someone's a businessman doesn't mean he's a capitalist; he may be a complete collectivist & communist, as far as his philosophy goes. The conflation of business with capitalism is, at its root, a Marxist smear job against capitalism, and if you use that conflation yourself, then you are unwittingly being a mouthpiece for Marxism. Arguably, the best philosophical analysis of capitalism was done - not by Adam Smith - but by Ayn Rand. She even wrote the book "Capitalism: The unknown ideal".

I wouldn't have taken issue with you saying that "business" is not as rational as many would like to believe. That's arguably true.

Sep 20, 2019
Malthusian solution.


But the Malthusian theory of those problem humans has been debunked for years now.

Things are better than ever before in human history. As sub-Saharan African continues to rise out of poverty, population is now predicted to peak at 12 billion and begin receding.

Sep 20, 2019
korkedlame, your belief on the efficacy of marxism is as deluded as your imaginings of capitalism

i guess that makes you the last of the randian uber-statist of racist hypocrisy

unless you're reviving the theosophist monstrosity?

seems pointless to me,
you flogging the dead, rotting corpses of obsolete & redundant-to-needs political fantasies

face it, tour comments have been irrelevant since the rise of czar stalin & the huángdì mao

Sep 20, 2019
kordane
Stop conflating business with capitalism
Well - I am not sure I understand your need to make a point of drawing this distinction. Please note that I was responding to Vendi - who was the one to bring up the topic of 'capitalism.' I think that you are dodging - by wanting to make an issue - of the difference between a capitalist, and a business person. My point is that the current system we live under - here in the U.S. - is generally referred to as a capitalist system. There are many very legitimate criticisms of this system. Proponents of 'capitalism' seem to often be very religious in their cheer leading for this system, (not al all accusing Vendi of this), but not willing to acknowledge it's flaws - which are in my view - many, and serious.

Sep 21, 2019
@greenonions1

When you call the US a "capitalist system", that is a smear against capitalism, which I will not tolerate. The objective truth of the matter is that the US is a "mixed economy" (look it up if you don't know the term), and so all of your criticisms should be levelled at that model.

Sep 21, 2019
Kordane - you are engaging in distractive semantics. I know the US has a mixed economy. As does almost every other country in the world (you could argue every other country). As you point out - my argument is against the U.S. system. Many refer to it as Capitalist.
The United States is often described as a "capitalist" economy
https://usa.usemb...hap2.htm

Now - do you want to show me an example of a pure capitalist economy? Do you want an argument about a purely hypothetical economic system - that does not really exist. Yes - my beef is with Neo Liberal Free Market economics. Vendi used the term capitalist - and I was going with the term. My bigger point - is that many express a religious like worship of a free market system - that they often call capitalism - without acknowledging the many and serious flaws of that system. When pushed to show an example of this system - they can't.

Sep 21, 2019
The thing about naive libertardians is they're naive libertardians.


Sep 21, 2019
@greenonions1
do you want to show me an example of a pure capitalist economy?


None exist, but that doesn't matter, because we know that the more capitalist an economy is, the better it does and the more prosperous everyone is - whereas the less capitalist an economy is, the worse it does and the less prosperous everyone is.

My bigger point - is that many express a religious like worship of a free market system - that they often call capitalism - without acknowledging the many and serious flaws of that system


I'm not aware of any "serious flaws". The flaws I find ascribed to it are either the result of the conflation of business with capitalism (the failures of businesses are then pinned on capitalism), or the result of the non-capitalist (eg. fascist or socialist) elements in whatever mixed economy is being cited.

Simply put, capitalism is a political system in which the individual's unalienable rights are protected (via the military, police & courts).

Sep 21, 2019
because we know that the more capitalist an economy is, the better it does and the more prosperous everyone is - whereas the less capitalist an economy is, the worse it does and the less prosperous everyone is
No - we don't know that.
capitalism is a political system in which the individual's unalienable rights are protected
Where do you get your definition? I am more comfortable with this kind of definition - http://capitalism...italism/ (read paragraph 2).
I'm not aware of any "serious flaws
Because you don't want to be. Environmental destruction, wealth disparity, grinding levels of poverty, lack of access to health care - are but a few.

Sep 21, 2019
the way i see it?
you'all are just arguing over how many Engels you cab get to do a can-can on the head of a pin

debating about hypothetical economic systems is tedious enough among tenured academics
but a useless waste of time on these comments

here?
the real argument is between commercially produced political slogans
& how much they influence our opinions of the speculations & conclusions advanced by the writers & editors if these articles

& totally irrelevant to the scientific research
except as attempts to influence private & public funding of the work

Sep 21, 2019
but a useless waste of time on these comments
Maybe. My process here is to challenge the religious right - who talk in slogans, rather than acknowledging facts on the ground. So they say "Capitalism is the greatest system in the world - and there is no viable alternative." I disagree with you that we are debating hypotheticals. I am talking real world. The system I live in (call it capitalism - or free markets - or neo liberalism - or what every other word you want to choose - is seriously jacking up our world. We need to explore other options - in the real world. We need to take control of our world from the criminal thugs, and see if we can't find a better way. A market system with ethics - may be interesting to explore. Right now the oil companies, and the oligarchs have it wrapped up.

Sep 21, 2019
Capitalism is the political system from the philosophy of Individualism, and the free market is the economic system that capitalism makes possible. ... the best philosophical analysis of capitalism was done - not by Adam Smith - but by Ayn Rand.


Who gives a flying fuck about philosophy, especially one that aligns with the ideology of libertarianism? The only difference between that and religious superstition is that religion is entirely wrong. Not surprising since these essentially superstitions have no method to arbitrate facts as only science & technology has.

Capitalism is a lot of things for a lot of different people [ https://en.wikipe...pitalism ]. As part of a free market system, it is like democracy - the worst of systems, except all the others. It works, the others do not.

Sep 21, 2019
green, i can, in general or should that be generically?
agree with your efforts to educate the perpetually truant from education

however, my view of this desperate situation, we as a society are mired in?
results in my being more sympathetic to the opinions expressed by torbjorn

though i suspicion that i am a lot more radical a cynic then either of you


Sep 21, 2019
BP has just sold all its oil and gas assets in Alaska to cut its carbon footprint in order to be consistent with the Paris Accord. This is a needless sale of assets caused by an 'Act of Extortion-The Paris Accord' against the shareholders [owners] of BP under the force of false premise concerning climate change''
''The company that purchased the assets said it is going to invest more heavily in the fields than what BP had planned to invest resulting in increased emissions.''

https://www.armst...ysteria/

Sep 22, 2019
@greenonions1
Environmental destruction, wealth disparity, grinding levels of poverty, lack of access to health care - are but a few.


None of those apply to capitalism, because capitalism is just about the government protecting the individual's unalienable rights.

If you want to see environmental destruction, then advocate a commons, where you'll inevitably get a "tragedy of the commons" - The solution to which was the institution of private property and protection of rights thereof.

"Wealth disparity" is a completely bogus non-issue that is being used to masquerade the real causes (eg. big government) of poverty, and enrichment of a tiny elite.

Grinding levels of poverty are found under systems of big government and subsequent tyranny. By contrast, as a country becomes more capitalist, poverty rapidly decreases.

The best access to healthcare is on a free market, because it would be cheap, high quality & widely available.

Sep 22, 2019
@greenonions1
The system I live in (call it capitalism - or free markets - or neo liberalism - or what every other word you want to choose - is seriously jacking up our world. We need to explore other options


The system you live in, as do I, is a mixed economy. The reason for the problems of the mixed economy lay exclusively at the feet of the non-capitalist elements. If you want to eliminate those problems, get rid of the non-capitalist elements, and just have pure capitalism. Of course, this is an option that you won't want to "explore". Instead, you will just want to "explore" proven tyrannical disasters, like socialism, fascism and communism - which have been tried 100+ times and resulted in varying degrees of economic destruction & tyranny. You would add one more failure to the huge pile of failure already attempted. I think we've "explored" that route plenty enough, and now it's time to give limited government & individual liberty/rights a try.

Sep 22, 2019
@torbjorn_b_g_larsson
Who gives a flying fuck about philosophy, especially one that aligns with the ideology of libertarianism?


Everyone should give a "fuck" about philosophy, because everyone has a philosophy whether they know it or not, and it's better to know one's philosophy and have rigorously thought about it, than not. Most people drift through life never examining their philosophy; just blindly accepting this, that and the other, from the social atmosphere - resulting in a philosophical mess of contradictions and bad ideas.

Sep 22, 2019
Kordane
None of those apply to capitalism, because capitalism is just about the government protecting the individual's unalienable rights
I already asked you where you got your definition - and you refuse to answer. You also admitted that there is no example of pure capitalism - so you are speaking purely hypothetically.

The best access to healthcare is on a free market, because it would be cheap, high quality & widely available
Prove it.

My interest is not in having a hypothetical debate about philosophy. I am interested in real world. The U.S. is seen as a very capitalistic economy. Yes it is mixed. This economy has created a mess. One example - https://www.salon...partner/

So all I am saying - is that we should be striving to do better. I agree with limited gvt, and individual liberties. Not bankster capitalism.


Sep 22, 2019
@greenonions1
I already asked you where you got your definition - and you refuse to answer. You also admitted that there is no example of pure capitalism - so you are speaking purely hypothetically


Sorry, didn't notice your question. I got it from Ayn Rand, who wrote the book on Capitalism.

Yes, there is no example of pure capitalism, but we can clearly see that the more capitalist a nation is the more prosperous everyone is, and the less capitalist a nation is, the less prosperous everyone is - https://www.herit.../ranking - So my question is: Why not go full capitalism if that's the case?

The U.S. is seen as a very capitalistic economy. Yes it is mixed. This economy has created a mess


The "mess" is the result of the non-capitalist elements. This is clearly evident in how the "mess" has increased in unison with the increase in non-capitalist elements & decrease in capitalist elements. Reverse that trend if you want the "mess" to decrease.

Sep 22, 2019
@greenonions1
The U.S. is seen as a very capitalistic economy


According to - https://www.herit.../ranking - The US is only 12th most economically free in the world. It is not 1st, contrary to all the romantics who claim it is. 12th means that the US is only "mostly free", rather than actually "free". Interestingly, so-called "socialist" Sweden is 19th, because the "socialist" trope isn't actually true, and Sweden is actually pretty capitalist compared to the rest of the world, despite the non-capitalist elements dragging it down to 19th. Tell that to your pal, Bernie Sanders, please ;)

Would you be willing to go and live in an anti-capitalist country, like North Korea (180th), Venezuela (179th), or Cuba (178th)?

Sep 22, 2019
I got it from Ayn Rand, who wrote the book on Capitalism
Yes - I have read Rand. The anti government writer - who drew Social security, and Medicare. Interesting article here on Rand - https://www.alter...killers/

Would you be willing ...
No. But my criticism is not of specific countries. It is of a global system that promotes greed.
The "mess" is the result of the non-capitalist elements
You have done nothing to support this assertion. However - the big point for me - is that I totally agree that we want a system with maximum freedom, and minimum government. But - capitalism supports greed. So somehow we have to develop a system that maximizes that freedom - but also is compassionate towards your fellow humans, and the Earth that is your home. Capitalism fails on these counts. The details of that other system - to be determined.

Sep 22, 2019
the Prophet George Orwell warned that our time would be perpetual war
which is the unspoken goal of the fake capitalists
dreaming of achieving oligarchic-state-enforced & taxpayer-subsidized monopolies
that they can claim the status of plutocrat

the difference between George Orwell & Ayn Rand was?
HE made the effort to practice his ideals

SHE was a flaming hypocrite preaching racism of the anti-science of eugenics

Rand never displayed the courage to confront her false promises
sje was never a successful businesswoman

just like all her followers who are morally bankrupt failures as Human Beings

my suspicion is, that when she could no longer ignore that she was a fraud & a bad person?
was when she committed suicide

Sep 22, 2019
he Prophet George Orwell warned that our time would be perpetual war''

Trump tries to stop that == Orange Man Bad !!!

Sep 22, 2019
@greenonions1
...who drew Social security, and Medicare


Ah yes, that most classic of classic smears. Of course, ignorant as you are of her philosophy, you fail to understand that in doing so she was simply recovering money that was stolen from her in taxes, lost time, etc and so she was acting consistently with her philosophy. Fact.

I totally agree that we want a system with maximum freedom, and minimum government. But - capitalism supports greed. So somehow we have to develop a system that maximizes that freedom - but also is compassionate towards your fellow humans


Imo, as soon as you said the word "but", everything before the "but" became null & void.

You only think that though, because you've been raised with the altruist ethics; with the idea that the primary source of virtue is found in human sacrifice, as opposed to self-interest (of which greed is a part). Answer me this: WHY should I sacrifice myself to others? (For what Earthly reason)

Sep 22, 2019
she was acting consistently with her philosophy
How convenient. I am against gvt - unless it benefits me - then I am for gvt. Sounds very Trumpian.

Answer me this: WHY should I sacrifice myself to others?
Because we all share this planet together - and can make choices. I can choose to act in my own self interest - and also see a level of responsibility to those less fortunate than myself. Or I can take the attitude - 'I will hoard everything I can for myself - and I don't give a shit about any one else.' That is your choice.

Sep 22, 2019
How convenient. I am against gvt - unless it benefits me - then I am for gvt


How was she "for government" when her motive was the recovery of her own money stolen from her by the government?

For instance, if a thief picked your pocket, and then the thief offered to give you some of it back, and you agreed to take it - According to you, that's somehow an endorsement of the thief and the act of giving one's sanction to the act of theft.

Just stop for a moment and think how absurd your logic is.

Because we all share this planet together - and can make choices


That's a platitude, not an answer to my question. So what if we "share the planet" and can "make choices"? It doesn't explain WHY I should sacrifice myself to anyone. Give me some Earthly reasoning for WHY I should do it.

Sep 22, 2019
Give me some Earthly reasoning for WHY I should do it
It is called compassion. Perhaps you don't have any compassion for others. If I see someone drowning - I don't need any 'Earthly reason' for saving them - other than they are a human being, and I am a human being - and I can help them. You need to be given a 'reason.' The funny thing is - that as an atheist - I am often told that atheists are not capable of morality - because morality comes from god. But as an intelligent human - capable of reason - I derive my own morality. I help others if i can - without needing a 'reason.' I think we are done with this thread. I see you and a monster - seeing only your own self interest - and not having any sense of community, or shared responsibility.

Sep 22, 2019
well, the kork reveals him/her/its-self as an infantile hatemonger
safely ensconced in his/her/its mommy's basement

lacking the capacity for productive work,
the kork is supported by his/her/its momma's social security & welfare checks
because,
he/she/it is entitled to be a useless parasite feeding from society's anus

Sep 22, 2019
@greenonions1
It is called compassion


Don't confuse compassion/benevolence (good will towards others) with altruism (human sacrifice for others), because they are NOT the same thing.

Compassion is not an Earthly reason to sacrifice oneself to others; it is merely a feeling.

If I see someone drowning - I don't need any 'Earthly reason' for saving them - other than they are a human being, and I am a human being - and I can help them


That's not an Earthly reason; it's merely an identification of the species involved.

I derive my own morality. I help others if i can - without needing a 'reason.'


I fail to see the logic or virtue in sacrificing yourself causelessly. Also, I highly doubt you derive altruism all by yourself; you were taught.

I see you and a monster - seeing only your own self interest - and not having any sense of community, or shared responsibility


I'm still waiting for you to give an Earthly reason to sacrifice myself to others.

Sep 22, 2019
@greenonions1
I see you and a monster - seeing only your own self interest - and not having any sense of community, or shared responsibility


As an individualist, I reject the collectivist terms: "sense of community" and "shared responsibility". These are collectivist rationalisations to get you to bend the knee to altruism's demand that you sacrifice to others, sacrifice to society, sacrifice to the state, sacrifice to the four year plan, etc. There have been tyrants going back millennia who have used this same rationalisation to con & force their fellow Man into becoming sacrificial fodder.

I'm against the human sacrifice you advocate, just as much as I am against the human sacrifice the Aztecs employed when they took human beings up to the tops of their temples and cut out their hearts.

You claim to be an Atheist, and yet the morality you advocate comes directly from religion. You never originated altruism yourself; you were raised with it like most people (me too).

Sep 22, 2019
These are collectivist rationalisations to get you to bend the knee to altruism's demand that you sacrifice to others
No - they are explanations of a system of morality. The golden rule. You keep using the term sacrifice - which is weird. I simply state - that we all share this Earth together - and can behave selfishly - or with compassion. I don't recognize your distinction of compassion and altruism. I simply believe in recognizing that I am not the only one on this planet - and that we have to learn to co-exist. Again - I see your view point as that of a monster. The tyrants of history had self interest - and lack of acceptance of shared responsibility in common. It amazes me that you can be so cavalier - about being such a monster.

Sep 22, 2019
I think Kordane's comments suggest strongly that he's something of a sociopath. I've seen other's with the same attitude ("what's in it for me?" "why should I care?") that has made me wonder. The evidence for AGW and its associated problems are extremely strong and very evident to anyone bothering to look. You need to be willfully ignorant to miss the evidence. There used to be someone on here that went by the name of "grandpa" suggesting that he had both children and grandchildren. Climate science deniers generally don't keep their denial secret, so their attitudes must be known to their progeny. Which means the kids and grandkids all know that the denier doesn't give a rat's a$$ about them. Must make for interesting family dinners. ;)

Sep 23, 2019
@greenonions1
I simply state - that we all share this Earth together - and can behave selfishly - or with compassion


You can be selfish & compassionate at the same time. Altruism, by contrast, makes compassion impossible, because it turns self-sacrifice into a moral obligation/duty that you must perform regardless of whether you want to or not. I reiterate: Don't conflate altruism with compassion, because they are not the same thing.

I simply believe in recognizing that I am not the only one on this planet - and that we have to learn to co-exist


I agree, although whether that means we have to sacrifice ourselves (and be sacrificed) to others, or whether we can non-sacrificially collaborate and trade with others, is the real question.

The tyrants of history had self interest - and lack of acceptance of shared responsibility


Nope, they implemented EXACTLY what you preach (altruism + collectivism), and the result was mass poverty, destruction, death & tyranny.

Sep 23, 2019
@zz5555
I think Kordane's comments suggest strongly that he's something of a sociopath. I've seen other's with the same attitude ("what's in it for me?" "why should I care?")


How am I anti-social when I favour collaboration & trade with others, exchanging value for value to mutual advantage?

The questions "what's in it for me?" and "why should I care?" are perfectly legitimate & rational questions that only seem to be met by altruist-collectivists with the response "because we say so". Sorry, but I need a bloody good reason to do anything. I don't care to act causelessly or to my own detriment as some kind of human sacrifice - no matter how much you might want me to immolate myself.

I have asked the question "WHY should I sacrifice to others?" and demanded an Earthly reason for it. Thus far, I've heard nothing but vague & empty platitudes about how "we're all human beings" or how "we all need to get along", as if that somehow answers the question (hint: it doesn't).

Sep 24, 2019
Nope, they implemented EXACTLY what you preach (altruism + collectivism)
Nope - they implemented selfishness. The Nazis (for example) saw many other groups as sub human. They did not acknowledge that we are all in this together - and can either step on each other in order to climb to the top, or see a level or responsibility to each other.

Sep 24, 2019
@greenonions1
Nope - they implemented selfishness


That statement lacks ANY sense of historical verisimilitude. Look up "New Soviet Man"; he was the Communist ideal of what Man should be like:- A perfectly selfless, altruistic & collectivist version of Man who didn't have a selfish bone in his body. New Soviet Man was what the Soviet state (and Mao, in China) sought to force/coerce Man to be like.

The Nazis (for example) saw many other groups as sub human. They did not acknowledge that we are all in this together - and can either step on each other in order to climb to the top, or see a level or responsibility to each other


The Communists thought the same thing, but where the Nazis did so wrt race, the Communists did so wrt class. Nazis treated certain races (eg. jews) as sub human & the Communists treated certain classes (eg. the bourgeoisie & kulaks) as sub human. This is what happens when you embrace collectivism, rather than individualism.

Sep 24, 2019
This is what happens when you embrace collectivism, rather than individualism.
Your words are meaningless to me. No different than talking about globalism. It is just a reality that we all share this planet. Understanding this - does not mean I believe in one world government. What I do believe in is having respect - not just for myself, but also for others. Respect in the sense that i recognize their right to exist - and my responsibility to treat them with decency. It is the difference between saying 'take what you need, but don't take too much.' And saying - take as much as you possibly can - and don't give a shit about other people. I think that you and I talk past each other - and I do see your 'objectivism,' and being the philosophy of selfish monsters - just like the Nazis - who had no problem in trying to wipe out whole populations.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more