
So, there’s now a (currently offline) preface (of sorts) for this – assuming it is to become another book length piece or at least borrow from that linear kind of structure.
It’s a quite personal account of being told by an ‘authority’ at that time of the need to finish what one starts. It’s prompting thinking about limits but there’s more to it than that.
In the context of this work we should certainly be mindful of limits to ‘natural resources’, for instance. However, there’s something central to that thinking that’s flawed. That is, the conceptualisation of a beginning and an end to phenomena is not always apt being especially dependent upon scale.
That’s not to say we can always act with impunity towards extraction of capital especially from Earth but that, if we are aware of those limits, it may be possible to work with them rather than against them?
There may be no beginning and there may be no end. Certainly, demarcating where something begins and ends can be problematic especially if causality is eschewed and again scale must be taken into account.
For example, if we’re to inhabit other planets in the future can we begin to state that we’ve naturally exhausted this one? In that case Maximum Earth may not be of concern.
Nature itself cycles. We cycle. Everything may go round and round. Perhaps, ultimately, it’s trying that counts whilst not being unduly concerned about beginning and ends.
You must be logged in to post a comment.