Sep 20, 2022·edited Sep 20, 2022Liked by Rachel Donald
Given that you have cited Zizek's argument, give some consideration to interviewing Dr Tali Sharot (Neuroscientist). Following outlines her work:
Sharot, T. (2017). Facts Don't Win Fights: Here’s How to Cut Through Confirmation Bias. (T. Sharot, Performer) YouTube (Big Think Channel). Retrieved August 01, 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyioZODhKbE
Sharot, T. (2017). The Influential Mind: What the Brain Reveals about Our Power to Change Others. New York, NY, USA: MacMillan.
Its the hierarchal structure that's the problem not the resulting political struggles in how to operate it. Any particular political organization in control would not steer the thing in a sustainable direction as hierarchies must overuse resources to exist. The solution is always worse than the natural cure sort of thing. I think I made a mistake following a political journalist.
Sep 20, 2022·edited Sep 20, 2022Liked by Rachel Donald
This view of the problem is rendered moot if the hierarchial structure contains attention to an ethical or moral code. Thus, the solution subsequently implied is to work on making 'political' control more ethical. Intuitively, that is correct. The trick is to put it into practical effect, i.e. how do we make politics, politicians and decisions-makers more ethically accountable for all things that impact the planet - including the example you cite? i.e. use of planetary resources. Thus, you make no mistake in following a 'political' investigative journo.
Ok. Words are losing their influence along with the politics is apparent. The condemnation of one side to the benefit of the other side just rubs me the wrong way when nothing changes either way.
Given that you have cited Zizek's argument, give some consideration to interviewing Dr Tali Sharot (Neuroscientist). Following outlines her work:
Sharot, T. (2017). Facts Don't Win Fights: Here’s How to Cut Through Confirmation Bias. (T. Sharot, Performer) YouTube (Big Think Channel). Retrieved August 01, 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyioZODhKbE
Sharot, T. (2017). The Influential Mind: What the Brain Reveals about Our Power to Change Others. New York, NY, USA: MacMillan.
See also this (about) post in LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6918990454357180416?updateEntityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_feedUpdate%3A%28V2%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A6918990454357180416%29
Great, thanks so much.
Its the hierarchal structure that's the problem not the resulting political struggles in how to operate it. Any particular political organization in control would not steer the thing in a sustainable direction as hierarchies must overuse resources to exist. The solution is always worse than the natural cure sort of thing. I think I made a mistake following a political journalist.
This view of the problem is rendered moot if the hierarchial structure contains attention to an ethical or moral code. Thus, the solution subsequently implied is to work on making 'political' control more ethical. Intuitively, that is correct. The trick is to put it into practical effect, i.e. how do we make politics, politicians and decisions-makers more ethically accountable for all things that impact the planet - including the example you cite? i.e. use of planetary resources. Thus, you make no mistake in following a 'political' investigative journo.
Now I noticed the author liked your comment but not mine. My ideas have no bearing.
Ok. Words are losing their influence along with the politics is apparent. The condemnation of one side to the benefit of the other side just rubs me the wrong way when nothing changes either way.