Comment by jacquesm | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jacquesm | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

It's just a way to do whatever you want to do 'because it doesn't make a difference anyway'.

But it does make a difference: because you chose not to fly and by telling others that you chose not to fly and why you are setting an example. That act, multiplied by thousands does have an effect.

So your individual choices do matter, because you are not only affecting yourself but also those around you, who in turn may affect those around them and so on. Virality is at every scale made up of small connections.

I could easily afford a new car. Instead, I've bought an old one which will last me at least another 5 years at a very small fraction of the price and the environmental impact of buying a new one. Anybody that challenges me on why I drive an old boat like that is a primary candidate for a lesson on what the environmental impact of a new vehicle - even one that is more energy efficient than this old one - is.

And so on, hopefully with a replication factor > 1.

Talking down to people about their choices because you see it as a cop-out is a great way to reduce your replication factor.

If you think that it's useful to set an example, then fine. But if I honestly think that my example isn't going to change anybody else's mind, then it's not a "cop-out" to take a flight anyway because the marginal contribution to climate change is down in the noise.

> Talking down to people about their choices because you see it as a cop-out is a great way to reduce your replication factor.

You have a point, but if your mind has already been made up then what difference does it make how I see it?

> But if I honestly think that my example isn't going to change anybody else's mind, then it's not a "cop-out" to take a flight anyway because the marginal contribution to climate change is down in the noise.

You too are somebody, and if you can't convince yourself that your actions ultimately (especially when taken over a lifetime) add up to something tangible then I'm not sure what I could say to you that would change your mind.

But let's just for a moment assume that everybody thinks like you: that would be one world. And then let's imagine a world where people are more likely to think like me, that would be another world. My argument is that those worlds will materially differ and it is all those small decisions that made the difference.

It's a bit like war: if all the soldiers would refuse to fight the war would end, immediately. But as long as they all collectively believe that their action or inaction will not make a difference the war will go on.

Yes, we're part of a collective. But responsibility is carried by all of us, individually, and that responsibility can't be waved away by saying 'my actions make no difference'.

If you can't convince me, a relatively rational person who firmly believes in anthropogenic climate change and the need to take action against it, to curtail my personal carbon emissions, then what hope do you have of making any difference through your example?

Imagine two more worlds: one where everybody but me thinks the way you do, and one where I think the way you do but everybody else thinks the way I do. My argument is that those worlds will also materially differ, but in this case the "good" one is the one where I don't do anything.

You need to show me that changing my own personal habits will somehow noticeably push the world toward one of the "good" ones. All you've offered so far is a bunch of wishful thinking about how if everybody thought this way, it would be better. It's true, but changing my habits doesn't do anything to change other people's minds.

It is a bit like war, except that we don't have an army. There's an implacable enemy out there, and there's no organized resistance. You're telling me that I ought to pick up a gun and go fight. I'm saying that this would be silly, I'll just be instantly killed by the enemy without making a dent in threat they pose. Instead of convincing individuals to individually grab guns and charge the enemy, we need to raise an army. We need to get everyone together and act collectively.

You don't raise an army by going around criticizing people for not fighting the enemy. You need to create an organization, you need hierarchy and structure and doctrine and funding and a mandate from people with power, and only then can you productively go around telling people they ought to join up to fight the enemy.

Awesome! Go raise your army!

So by the same rationalization you don't vote either?

I do, but pretty much just so people can't tell me I don't have a right to complain. I vote, but I don't see how it can possibly matter.

Voting actually matters more, because it is more direct, short term find results are easily seen.

It is reasonably easy to convince people to vote for a relatively popular candidate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com