Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle Bob
I think that the obvious "fair" limit of consumption is currently a bit under one seven-billionth of what we can sustain without further reducing the natural world.
|
Yeah, but that merely opens up a whole other can of worms, like what is the definition of "not reducing the natural world", and who gets to decide what that definition will be?
I appreciate your best attempt at answering the question of what to do though.
A world in which excess is not created means no more exploration and innovation. Perhaps that's acceptable from an existence standpoint, but our nature isn't to merely exist, but to find meaning. Meaning is often found in exploration and innovation. Eliminate the possibility of excesses, and you've eliminated meaning for many people.