I'm really enjoying these. I was wondering if you would discuss the nature of the name 'anthropocene' and how it is an incomplete picture. I appreciate your take. I've always though it is not so much that all humans have caused the havoc but our propensity towards civilization that has caused it. I work for a centre with anthropocene in its name but, privately, I call it the civilicene. I look forward to reading more.
Hi Jacqueline: Thanks so much for joining the conversation. Can you tell me a bit more about what you'd like to me to discuss? I do explore the flaws of the "Anthropocene" term in #7 at the start of this May 6th post. You're certainly right that everything changed when the culture(s) that emphasized large-scale agriculture and urban human habitat began to spread across the world. Now everyone is caught up, one way or another, with a model of civilization that takes too much and respects too little.
I apologise. I was unclear. When I read the first installment I wondered if you would discuss the term. Then it showed up in the May 6 post and I really enjoyed it!
No apology necessary, Jacqueline. I'm glad we had the same questions about the term and its implications. Glad you liked the writing. Please feel free to send more thoughts in the weeks and months ahead.
I find your articles very interesting. RE: First Article - I'm afraid that letting our front and back yards grow into little forests is not practical for us but, as a token gesture, I will no longer pull up the dandelions.
Enjoyed the read Jason. Here's the gem that I found "Well, we can fail because very few of our successes are about restraint." It says something about our solutions being outward looking rather than inward looking.
Thanks, Tom. You've said it well; the outward-looking solutions get all the attention because they're technical, marketable, and flashy, and because they don't ask anything of us.
I'm really enjoying these. I was wondering if you would discuss the nature of the name 'anthropocene' and how it is an incomplete picture. I appreciate your take. I've always though it is not so much that all humans have caused the havoc but our propensity towards civilization that has caused it. I work for a centre with anthropocene in its name but, privately, I call it the civilicene. I look forward to reading more.
Hi Jacqueline: Thanks so much for joining the conversation. Can you tell me a bit more about what you'd like to me to discuss? I do explore the flaws of the "Anthropocene" term in #7 at the start of this May 6th post. You're certainly right that everything changed when the culture(s) that emphasized large-scale agriculture and urban human habitat began to spread across the world. Now everyone is caught up, one way or another, with a model of civilization that takes too much and respects too little.
I apologise. I was unclear. When I read the first installment I wondered if you would discuss the term. Then it showed up in the May 6 post and I really enjoyed it!
No apology necessary, Jacqueline. I'm glad we had the same questions about the term and its implications. Glad you liked the writing. Please feel free to send more thoughts in the weeks and months ahead.
Jason, you write everything you write so beautifully. I am honored to be reading it.
Thanks so much, Olivia. It means a lot coming from you. Be well.
I find your articles very interesting. RE: First Article - I'm afraid that letting our front and back yards grow into little forests is not practical for us but, as a token gesture, I will no longer pull up the dandelions.
Thank you, Joseph. Give my regards to your dandelions (and Gail).
Enjoyed the read Jason. Here's the gem that I found "Well, we can fail because very few of our successes are about restraint." It says something about our solutions being outward looking rather than inward looking.
Thanks, Tom. You've said it well; the outward-looking solutions get all the attention because they're technical, marketable, and flashy, and because they don't ask anything of us.