If one thinks there are people who (should) bear a certain amount of responsibility for what they do and what they do not, that is, if one believes to know who to accuse, then, indeed, there is guilt.
Once upon a time, there was a human ecologist. He came and said earnestly: Think globally, act locally!
And thus he did. He thought oh so globally, and he acted only locally. By chance, nobody knows him, but he lived happily ever after.
Why don’t the newscasters cry
when they read about people who die
Why don’t human ecologists cry when they give their talks, when they take part in conferences and discussions, or when they present their posters?
At least they could be decent enough
to put just a tear in their eyes
Why don’t we cry?
Well mama said
It’s just make believe
You can’t believe everything you see
So baby close your eyes to the lullabies
On the news tonight
In a nice lecture series on human ecology (PDFs) I recently asked the lecturers and the audience what we can agree upon. My question was provoked since many lecturers repeatedly stressed the importance of diversity and tolerance. Anyway, my question was at most answered by silence.
So, I asked: “Can we agree upon the fact that we should agree upon something,” which in fact led to quite a discussion about what we might agree upon (for instance a discussion of indicators of sustainable development). One argument chased another only until someone asked why after all we have to agree upon something. Well, of course, they clearly see a need for diversity and alternatives, also in regard to strategies and opinions.
I then asked: “You mean we should agree that we should not agree?”