Response to Fanaticism of the Apocalypse

I am not quite certain how I feel about this work. I agree with the author: we often speak about our relationship to nature in problematic ways. And yet, I feel the work is a bit snobbish, a bit overworked. The majority of his argument can be gleaned from the Introduction and the Epilogue.

However, as poorly written and over written as I feel it is, Bruckner has some great points

FEAR IS BAD: The Western Catastrophism that Bruckner rails against is, I agree, very detrimental. It does not get anything done. It accuses, lays blame, instead of helps. The logic in this section is very much like that used by Abbey.

LET’S NOT BE ANTI-HUMAN: Whether we like it or not, humanity has the power to pull us out of the current issues with the environment. Technology will be our saving grace! It will be through great advancements that we can create a more “sustainable” world. Catastrophism would have us give up technology that saves thousands and makes our lives more comfortable.

PRISTINE NATURE DOES NOT EXIST SINCE HUMANITY: Bruckner here brings in the concept of original sin and shows how it is used by many to venerate the Earth and the “Noble Savage” (return to pre-technology).

PROGRESS IS NOT ALL BAD: “Progress”, Bruckner argues, will eventually save us (and help limit our impact on the Earth). Anti-science and anti-technology groups are missing the point according to Bruckner.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: