Name: TEDxOjai - Peter Joseph - The Big Question
Uploaded: 2018-11-29T08:15:11.000Z
Duration: 10 min 25 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Adverbs of manner

TEDx Ojai | x = Independently organized TED event

The title of this presentation is 'The Big Question:

Environmental Misalignment and the Value War'.

Human society today has two diametrically opposed systems of economy.

One is our traditionally imposed mode of monetary-market economics.

The other is a physical-rule structure emerging

from our growing scientific recognition of reality

The consequence is an ever-increasing level of social destabilization

I've divided this into two brief sections. The first part is called

'System Clash: Market Efficiency vs. Technical Efficiency'

Part two: 'Values Wars: Societal Potential, Collapse and Transition'

(what we're capable of doing, what's in store for us if we don't

Before I begin part one, what is economy?

It's defined in Greek as the management of a household

To economize, what does that mean? It means to increase efficiency.

Defining my terms, we'll use two terms throughout this presentation.

The first is a theoretical notion of the 'Earth Economy' which I'll define as

"Decisions made directly based upon scientific understandings

as they relate to optimized habitat management and human health."

Production and Distribution is regulated by the most technically efficient

compared to our currently existing 'market economy' defined [as]

"Decisions are based on independent human actions

regulated by the pressures of Supply and Demand.

Production and Distribution is enabled by the buying and selling

of labor and material provisions, with the motivations of a person or group

(the self- interest) as the defining attribute of unfolding.

This is a chart of seven economic attributes.

[There are] many more but this is what I wanted to focus on here.

Basically they are intrinsic to each economy, in comparison.

I'm focusing on the market economy and its relationship to a natural system

The only caveat here with these asterisks

are elements of our sociological development

based on scientific integrity and ingenuity:

the evolution of science and our knowledge of ourselves and the environment.

That will be talked about as we touch upon each one of these.

In a market economy the entire thing is based on consumption.

The only reason that you're wearing clothes, that you're eating

or that you have a home is because someone somewhere is

buying or giving a service, exchanging money in some form and consuming.

What does the natural world have to say about that?

What does an 'earth economy' have to say?

Preservation, not consumption, should be the ethos.

If you lived on an island with a small group of people

and you had a finite amount of resources with a natural generation of growth

a very simplified society, would you decide to make an economic system

that tried to use that up as fast as possible?

No, and I'm afraid the Earth is an isolated island

in a vast cosmic sea, and is a lot smaller than we think.

2) Obsolescence: The market system is driven explicitly by obsolescence.

meaning that every good produced has to be inferior

the moment it's made because the corporate institutions must save money

at the very beginning of production to remain competitive

[and] Planned Obsolescence, which is much more insidious

a form of fraud (even though it's completely codified

and formalized as a marketing tactic) basically designs goods

to break down under the assumption of repeat purchases.

It's truly amazing that this exists at all.

What does Nature have to say about this? Building upon what we just stated:

It's environmentally irresponsible to design goods to fail

That is basically offensive. We need optimum design

The ownership metaphysic is a core premise

allowing controlled restriction of resources and goods.

I say metaphysic because property isn't real.

There's not such thing as ownership in the broad scheme

not either intellectual or physical goods.

The idea of everyone owning one of everything for example.

Does that make a lot of sense when we think about our natural economy?

What about the use of goods? What about access?

The natural environment demands access. Universal property is inefficient.

Strategic access is more environmentally responsible

If you have a car that you drive maybe 40% of the time

why not let the other 60% be used by somebody else?

You create a system of access and use. That's environmentally responsible.

4) Growth, building on consumption once again

The market economy requires near constant growth to maintain employment.

This ties in a little bit with the growth of population as well.

You always hear about this in the government:

"We have growth. We need more growth, GDP. We're lacking growth."

We need a 'steady state' economy. The Earth is a finite system.

Subtitles ListPlay Video

TEDxOjai - Peter Joseph - The Big Question

potential

access

physical

basically