dactylotheca

  • 27 Posts
  • 217 Comments
Joined 16 days ago
cake
Cake day: June 18th, 2024

help-circle
  • I definitely don’t agree with that take.

    First of all, “terraforming” means “to make Earth-like”; climate mitigation is one thing, but if we let things here get bad enough that we have to start thinking about terraforming Terra, we’ve pretty thoroughly screwed the pooch at that point. Ending up with an Earth that is no longer Earth-like would mean that things have gone sideways so badly that I doubt we’d have the industrial capacity or resources to deal with it.

    Second, terraforming Mars involves a vastly different process than unfucking our climate and ecosystems. For example, Mars has a very thin atmosphere, which on top of being thin is mostly CO2 and doesn’t have more than trace amounts of oxygen. There’s also no magnetosphere to speak of because its “core dynamo” essentially died when its core cooled down and plate tectonics etc stopped being a thing, meaning that any atmosphere you do manage to generate is continuously getting blasted away by radiation.

    Terraforming Mars essentially means pumping more energy and gases into its climate system via whetever method, while the problem here on Earth is that we’ve pumped too much energy into the climate system and we’d have to somehow get it “out” again.




  • dactylothecaOPtowhen things get too real for me_irl@lemmy.ml2meirl4meirl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Oh yeah I’m not an anarcho-primitivist or an outright Kaczynski fan, but I honestly do think he had some really good points about the condition we find ourselves in. Of course he was slightly bonkers, and eg. the whole “I’ll fix things by murdering computer scientists” thing maybe wasn’t his best idea, and his definition of freedom was pretty strict – I don’t think that eg. stopping at a red traffic light robs me of essential freedoms.

    I’m big into degrowth though – so while I don’t want to totally dismantle all technological development since the wheel, I think it’s clear that we humans and the planet can’t handle the current mass-scale industrial information society and we need to pretty radically scale down our resource use and a lot of our current comforts if we want to avoid completely fucking our ecosystem.

    Here is a pretty good article on degrowth anarchism, in case anybody’s interested. Definitely worth reading even if you don’t agree with any of it







  • The solution for Earth isn’t going to be some pie-in-the-sky terraforming (which, I’d like to note, means “to make Earth-like”) project, but changing our psychotic economic system that depends on infinite growth and consistently elevates the worst of us into positions of power.

    That’s why I think we’ll never manage to unfuck ourselves. There’s just way too much power invested in keeping things the way they are







  • dactylothecaOPtoLefty Memes@lemmy.dbzer0.com[confused conservative noises]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    confused unga bunga

    Setting aside the fact that that only works for movies, how do you define “politics”? Wouldn’t have anything to do with having non-white, non-male characters now would it?

    Care to take another shot at defining “woke”? I know you’re literally incapable of it, but it’d be fun to see you try.






  • dactylothecatoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldSelective Outrage
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    They are willfully and malevolently … not ignorant

    Conservatives are not only more likely to have dark tetrad personality traits – Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy and everyday sadism – but they’re also more likely to be, in a word, stupid. They’re definitely malevolently ignorant; the question isn’t if they’re stupid or evil, they’re both.

    sources

    In the present research (N = 675), we focus on the relationship between the dark side of human personality and political orientation and extremism, respectively, in the course of a presidential election where the two candidates represent either left-wing or right-wing political policies. Narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and everyday sadism were associated with right-wing political orientation, whereas narcissism and psychopathy were associated with political extremism. Moreover, the relationships between personality and right-wing political orientation and extremism, respectively, were relatively independent from each other.

    We found eleven significant correlations between conservative [Moral Intuition Survey] judgments and the Dark Triad – [narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy,] all at significance level of p<.00001 – and no significant correlations between liberal [Moral Intuition Survey] judgments and the Dark Triad. We believe that these results raise provocative moral questions about the personality bases of moral judgments. In particular, we propose that because the Short-D3 measures three “dark and antisocial” personality traits, our results raise some prima facie worries about the moral justification of some conservative moral judgments

    I ran a follow-up study testing the Dark Triad against conservative and liberal judgments on 15 additional moral issues. The new issues examined include illegal immigration, abortion, the teaching of “intelligent design” in public schools, the use of waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation techniques” in the war on terrorism, laws defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and environmentalism. 1154 participants […] Twenty-two significant correlations were observed between “conservative” judgments and the Dark Triad (all of which were significant past a Bonferonni-corrected significance threshold of p = .0008), compared to seven significant correlations between Dark Triad and “liberal” judgments (only one of which was significant past p = .0008).

    [T]here exists a solid empirical paper trail demonstrating that lower cognitive abilities (e.g., abstract-reasoning skills and verbal, nonverbal, and general intelligence) predict greater prejudice. We discuss how the effects of lower cognitive ability on prejudice are explained (i.e., mediated) by greater endorsement of right-wing socially conservative attitude. […]

    Right-wing ideologies offer well-structured and ordered views about society that preserve traditional societal conventions and norms (e.g., Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003). Such ideological belief systems are particularly attractive to individuals who are strongly motivated to avoid uncertainty and ambiguity in preference for simplicity and predictability (Jost et al., 2003; Roets & Van Hiel, 2011). Theoretically, individuals with lower mental abilities should be attracted by right-wing social-cultural ideologies because they minimize complexity and increase perceived control (Heaven, Ciarrochi, & Leeson, 2011; Stankov, 2009). Conversely, individuals with greater cognitive skills are better positioned to understand changing and dynamic societal contexts, which should facilitate open-minded, relatively left-leaning attitudes (Deary et al., 2008a; Heaven et al., 2011; McCourt, Bouchard, Lykken, Tellegen, & Keyes, 1999). Lower cognitive abilities therefore draw people to strategies and ideologies that emphasize what is presently known and considered acceptable to make sense and impose order over their environment. Resistance to social change and the preservation of the status quo regarding societal traditions—key principles underpinning right-wing social-cultural ideologies—should be particularly appealing to those wishing to avoid uncertainty and threat.

    Indeed, the empirical literature reveals negative relations between cognitive abilities and right-wing social-cultural attitudes, including right-wing authoritarian (e.g., Keiller, 2010; McCourt et al., 1999), socially conservative (e.g., Stankov, 2009; Van Hiel et al., 2010), and religious attitudes (e.g., Zuckerman, Silberman, & Hall, 2013).

    Despite their important implications for interpersonal behaviors and relations, cognitive abilities have been largely ignored as explanations of prejudice. We proposed and tested mediation models in which lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice, an effect mediated through the endorsement of right-wing ideologies (social conservatism, right-wing authoritarianism) and low levels of contact with out-groups. In an analysis of two large-scale, nationally representative United Kingdom data sets (N = 15,874), we found that lower general intelligence (g) in childhood predicts greater racism in adulthood, and this effect was largely mediated via conservative ideology. A secondary analysis of a U.S. data set confirmed a predictive effect of poor abstract-reasoning skills on antihomosexual prejudice, a relation partially mediated by both authoritarianism and low levels of intergroup contact. All analyses controlled for education and socioeconomic status. Our results suggest that cognitive abilities play a critical, albeit underappreciated, role in prejudice. Consequently, we recommend a heightened focus on cognitive ability in research on prejudice and a better integration of cognitive ability into prejudice models.