In this year’s first blog post, I wrote some about the ancient idea of memento mori. (If you didn’t see or don’t remember that, click here.) Now, referring to some of my most important posts from 2022, I am wondering whether memento mori can apply to the world, not just individual people.
Once again, I am linking
to significant ideas of Michael Dowd, by whom I have been significantly influenced.*
In December of last year, he posted a new YouTube video titled “Sanity 101.” The
full version (here) is over 90 minutes long; the “Cliff Notes” version (here) is 30 minutes.
At some point, I encourage you to listen to one or both of those videos,
which have the subtitle, “Living Fully in an Age of Decline: Essential Wisdom for Hard Times.”
While still fully affirming the reality of overshoot and the collapse of
what he calls TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it), his emphasis in
this new video is “post doom, no gloom.”
Dowd’s main point is that we humans today should not deny what we find
disturbing or frightening but fully accept reality. In his opinion, formed by
extensive reading of scientists and informed thinkers, the predicament of
overshoot and collapse of the world’s civilization is certainly real.
So, acceptance of reality means making the most of the present rather
than holding on to hope of change for the better in the future. Accordingly, he
speaks pointedly about hopium, that is, holding on to false hopes that
prevents us from accepting reality.
Memento mori for us individuals means that we live as
meaningfully and as purposefully as possible now, fully realizing that
we will die at some point in the future.
Rightly understood, memento mori is not a morbid dwelling on our
approaching death, whenever that may be, but a healthy emphasis on living life
to the fullest today, and every day.
Perhaps this significant idea needs to be applied more broadly: since
the collapse of the world as we know it is inevitable, we need to make our
existence in this world now as meaningful as possible, living in this post-doom
time with no gloom.
This is a fruitful way for us older people to think. But what about our
grandchildren (a disturbing matter I plan to write about next month)?
In spite of all I have learned from Michael Dowd, I have a couple
of lingering questions/criticisms of his central emphases.
1) He repeatedly talks about the collapse of more than 100 civilizations
in the past, emphasizing that the current industrial civilization’s collapse
will be similar to those. But it seems to me that his point would be made more
strongly if he talked more clearly about the uniqueness of TEOTWAWKI.
None of the collapsed civilizations of the past were as global in scope
as the impending collapse, which could—and likely will!—mean a “mass extinction.”
According to National
Geographic, there have been five mass extinctions in the history of the earth; the
sixth has already started.**
The Nat
Geo article says the sixth mass extinction may occur as soon as 2260; Dowd
says it is most likely to occur in this century. so why, I wonder, does he repeatedly
emphasize the collapse of human civilizations in the past 4,000 years, none of
which, obviously, led to mass human extinction.
2) Dowd
repetitively emphasizes the futile nature of all human efforts to prevent
collapse. All current attempts to stem global warming are based on the
belief—or at least the hope—that that activity can and will result in reversal
of collapse. Dowd refers to all such efforts as hopium.
But even if all human actions are insufficient to deter mass extinction,
which they probably are, surely that doesn’t mean that concerted efforts would
not postpone that fate to some extent, and maybe even significantly.
Concern for my grandchildren and now for my two great-grandchildren,
makes me want to do more to help push as far into the future as possible what
might well be sure mass extinction.
If we take seriously memento mori as individuals, we still do
what we can to postpone our death, which is sure to occur at some point.
Similarly, if we apply the concept of memento mori to the present
world civilization, shouldn’t we wholeheartedly do all we can to delay the coming
collapse/extinction for as long as possible?
_____
* Last
year I mentioned Dowd in four blog posts; the first times are here and here.
**The last mass extinction
occurred about 66 million years ago, long before the first civilization of homo
sapiens, which began less than 4,500 years ago.
.jpg)
You might have touched here on the Issue of all issues! You know, I struggle with this myself, trying to live a responsible and caring life while watching the world burn -- in some ways, quite literally. I've read a lot of ethics over the years and taught ethics in philosophy courses. In the end, I think the best guide for ethical living is found in one of Dietrich Bonhoeffer's letters/reflections in his Letters and Papers from Prison. (Full disclosure the following summary of his sentiments is cut and pasted from one of my sermons.)
ReplyDeleteIn one of those meditations Bonhoeffer reflects on what ethical and responsible people are to do when societies are in trouble. He says we should not be simply outraged critics. He adds, we should not be opportunists, seeking our own advantage. He says success and failure are not ethically neutral realities; they are realities of great consequence for human beings. And we have to shoulder our share of responsibility for molding history. He thinks Christians should be ready to assume the burden of responsibility for history’s outcomes because they believe that the responsibility has been laid on them by God. They have a calling. That doesn't mean, though, that a lot of heroic theatrics are called for. There's nothing responsible, says Bonhoeffer, about "going down fighting like heroes in the face of certain defeat." That's "not really heroic at all," he says. It's "merely a refusal to face the future." In the end, he concludes, when we’ve gone through all the possible motivations and justifications for what we do, the most important ethical question to guide responsible people is how the coming generations will have to live.
Thanks for your helpful comments, Anton--and for recognizing that the issue addressed in this blog post is perhaps "the issue of all issues." I think that is a correct assessment of the situation.
DeleteI, too, have found Bonhoeffer's words (and actions) very instructive in my teaching not philosophy, as you, but Christian social ethics. Indeed, it is likely true that "the most important ethical question to guide responsible people is how the coming generations will have to live." But this will not be easy to do, for so many in the "coming generations" don't want suggestions/instructions about how they will have to live. On the other hand, there are those in the coming generation (e.g. Greta Thunberg and others like her) who are trying to teach us of the older generation how we need to live now.
Indeed! —Anton
DeleteHere are comments received a few minutes ago from local (and Cameroonian) Thinking Friend Joseph Ndifor:
ReplyDelete"An amazing topic of the day. 'Global Warming.' which politicians and corporations care less about, is so scary. About two summers ago, when it was so hot, making it literally impossible for one to even step out of the house, I told my boys that there's a possibility that we could get up one morning and the entire world vanishes because of the unbearable heat. They giggled each time I make a statement about humanity being wiped out of the surface of the earth because mankind's reckless activities. But it's real, and I'm glad that over the years children, even as young as those in elementary schools, are gradually being rightfully taught that the world is 'warming' and that we ought to fight back the effects of it."
Thanks for your pertinent comments, Joseph. I am always happy to hear from you.
DeletePlease note, though, that while global warming is a serious threat to all living beings on Earth today, it is just one of as many as ten threats to the natural environment that are perilous to the human race. See the article from Stanford University linked to below -- and note the image that appears early in the article. It is one that Michael Dowd uses in his videos.
https://mahb.stanford.edu/blog/end-being-boundaries/
On long trips my wife and I listen to many podcasts. One of those (by Yuval Noah Harari?) discussed the collapse of civilizations, and said that by seeing how most of them collapsed, it was clearly due to politics, not insurmountable problems. Ruling elites play political games based on short term rewards. Long term problems get widely ignored. This is exactly what is happening with global warming. It could have been fixed easily years ago. Even today, a hard fix is still possible. But politics! So the ruling elites take us along for the ride. While they pursue fantasies of escaping to Mars. If only they would all go, soon and very soon!
ReplyDeleteMemento mori definitely applies to the senior citizens who largely populate this blog. We are all approaching exit stage left. Civilizations follow a more complicated historical arc. Some do actually disappear, but many find a second act, maybe even a third or more. In the middle of all the wars, rumors of wars, and apocalyptic disasters, something seeming rather like the Kingdom of God is struggling to be born. Can we achieve a world where there is no Greek nor Jew, bond nor free, male nor female? Can we each sit in peace under our own vine and fig tree? Can we learn to tend the garden we have been given, instead of rapaciously exploiting it? We have so many tools, not just solar panels and windmills, but also education, birth control, urban redesign, and better theories of government that provide equity and equality. If justice does not flow down like waters, then even waters will not flow down much longer.
Thanks, as always, for your thought-provoking comments, Craig. June read Harari's book "Sapiens" for her book club a couple of years ago, and I looked at it a bit, but was somehow unimpressed. I guess I agree with some of the criticism of him I found on Wikipedia.
DeleteYour comments lead me to think that you haven't watched/listened to Dowd's video(s)--which is certainly understandable as thoughtfully watching a 90-minute, or even a 30-minute, video takes time and effort. But I do hope that you will find the time and exert the effort to do that at some point--and then let me and my blog readers know what you think.
Here are comments received before noon from Thinking Friend Glenn Hinson in Kentucky:
ReplyDelete"I don’t have the prophetic insight of Michael Dowd and have not thought about the end of the world as he has, but our slow response to the crisis of climate change makes me almost as pessimistic as Dowd is. I cling to a concept of hope put forth by Gregory of Nyssa in response to the widespread pessimism of the fourth century inspired by the fall of the Roman Empire in the West. He coined the word 'Epektasis,' 'stretching forth,' based on Philippians 3:12-16, where Paul, looking back on his own life, admits his imperfection and uncertainty but then declares, 'But one thing [I do], forgetting things that are behind, and stretching forward ('epekteinomenos'), I race toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God on Christ Jesus.' As Gregory applied 'epektasis,' he envisioned God pulling humankind upward and forward to achieve God’s purpose for humankind, the collapse of western civilization notwithstanding. Must we not do the same as we face the collapse of civilization growing out of the industrial revolution and posing such terrible problems?"
Thanks for your comments, Dr. Hinson. Here are a couple of responses that perhaps you and other readers of this blog might like to give some thought.
ReplyDelete1) You referred to Dowd being pessimistic, but I think he would reject that word (and I think I have heard him do so in one of his videos, but I don't remember which one). Scientific "fact" is not something one can be optimistic or pessimistic about. For example, one can't be optimistic or pessimistic about gravity. The only real possibility is accepting or rejecting reality. Thus, Dowd would say that on the basis of what he thinks is clear scientific evidence, he is being realistic, not pessimistic, about the coming collapse of industrial civilization.
2) And while I agree that Bishop Gregory's statements were very pertinent and helpful in the fourth century, the threat to the world's civilization today is far broader than that of the Roman Empire of his day, which had little contact with most of Africa and none with Asia or what is now the Americas. This is why I wrote about the impending collapse of civilization today as global and far more serious than any of the civilizations of the past, including the Roman Empire.
Perhaps the memento mori runs deeply in the requirement to "die to oneself" for the sake of others in one's own time and in time to come. Rosenstock-Huessy (one of his lectures) made a big fuss about the modern problem of "Sons and Fathers" as a reversal or abdication of responsibility; Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons" was more to the point, emphasizing the need to imbue tradition with genuine shared time, "making time" for right relationships between the generations and not to be sucked into novel yet false thinking. Not to forget essential morality.
ReplyDeleteR-H opined tantalizingly about the "time-space" relation: time is not the fourth dimension of space at all. "It is of course madness to ascribe three dimensions to space and a fourth dimension to time. The opposite is true: time has three dimensions--future, past, and present. And where we find those three, we also find the space of physics, the external space, and the fourth dimension of this three-dimensional time." That three-dimensional time belongs to and is a basis for his metanomical tool of sociological analysis described most recently in the English translation of his In the Cross of Reality, Volume 1: The Hegemony of Spaces, which concept he challenges. He wrote that men should "reckon" in marriages, baptisms of children, and funerals, . . . Whitsuntide, Christmas, Easter, and so forth. "These time-based celebrations seek to determine our thoughts, lifting them up in time, rather than space. They preach: Let us think of all spaces as structured times, as hours." "Our reality springs up from the most fortunate hour. . . . Because our thinking must have its hour, it can pass as a healing body into the body of the community" (254).
I value, you value, the times in community or family that arise from proper intention and love. Time for ourselves focuses healing and supporting time for others--for each other. Our hurrying around between and within spaces detracts and sometimes destroys. H-E thinks voluminously and never in straight lines.
I note that in the rise and fall of civilizations and empires, there is also a rise and fall of energy for each other, rather than in the power of ideas or even of religion, per se. Our sociologies must accord with reality, not theory. As for each other, so also between ourselves and our God. If our "gods", then we may expect trouble, for the gods, do they not sorely and jealously compete, and are they not then at times our own ha-satan, "the Accuser/Negater/Nihilism/Betrayer/Condemner" that we in fact personally inflict on each other?
When we do that, we fail to recognize that we are dangerously human; our utopian and self-aggrandizing tendencies are the stuff of hell (surely a place fashioned as if magically from the "time" someone dedicated to it in a particular space or place suited to their own designs). If it never becomes real, it is utopia; if it does become real, it may be hell.
In thinking about our responsibilities to each other and to the newer generations, we typically do not figure on preserving or furthering our "civilizations", our "complex societies, but we surely are concerned with keeping and grooming a healthy, lively, creative and nourishing culture. I think our recent focusing on the questions of "flourishing" in society is another way to consider it.
If only our polities/politics were able to achieve and to keep that focus.
Jerry, thanks so much for taking the time to write these lengthy and thought-provoking comments. And thanks for introducing Eugene Rosenstock-Huessy (1888~1973), an outstanding historian/scholar about whom I knew nothing.
DeleteThanks so much, Leroy!!
ReplyDelete