Speaking of accelerationism in the broadest sense, I've ordered a copy of Lyle Lewis's book "Racing toward Extinction". The book has been praised for its compelling and realistic approach to a topic many avoid. Reviewers appreciate Lewis's compassionate yet unflinching look at humanity's role in the sixth mass extinction, applauding his ability to make a potentially depressing subject into a fascinating read. Some reviewers have given it high marks for clarity, insight, and the urgency it imparts. However, there are criticisms regarding the book's speculative nature, particularly around the exact timeline for human extinction (e.g., predicting 2055). In advance of reading it, I was participating in an online discussion and pointed out there are still many places around the world where people live indigenously or at least have the cultural and skill background to do so if necessary. These are likely to be pockets of persistence as our current commercial civilization implodes. In his prediction of relatively near-term human extinction, I wonder if Lewis isn't totalizing the substantial decline in world population, which to me does seem very likely. One reply stated "In contrast to Lewis, authors like William Catton, who discuss concepts like "overshoot" and "bottleneck," might implicitly acknowledge such pockets through their discussions of how human societies might adapt or shrink back to more sustainable levels. Similarly, Thomas Murphy's focus on energy [Energy and Human Ambitions on a Finite Planet] might consider that lower energy use societies could survive better in a resource-scarce future."
I can't begin to wrap my head around this. We are so far gone from sanity 😟
Speaking of accelerationism in the broadest sense, I've ordered a copy of Lyle Lewis's book "Racing toward Extinction". The book has been praised for its compelling and realistic approach to a topic many avoid. Reviewers appreciate Lewis's compassionate yet unflinching look at humanity's role in the sixth mass extinction, applauding his ability to make a potentially depressing subject into a fascinating read. Some reviewers have given it high marks for clarity, insight, and the urgency it imparts. However, there are criticisms regarding the book's speculative nature, particularly around the exact timeline for human extinction (e.g., predicting 2055). In advance of reading it, I was participating in an online discussion and pointed out there are still many places around the world where people live indigenously or at least have the cultural and skill background to do so if necessary. These are likely to be pockets of persistence as our current commercial civilization implodes. In his prediction of relatively near-term human extinction, I wonder if Lewis isn't totalizing the substantial decline in world population, which to me does seem very likely. One reply stated "In contrast to Lewis, authors like William Catton, who discuss concepts like "overshoot" and "bottleneck," might implicitly acknowledge such pockets through their discussions of how human societies might adapt or shrink back to more sustainable levels. Similarly, Thomas Murphy's focus on energy [Energy and Human Ambitions on a Finite Planet] might consider that lower energy use societies could survive better in a resource-scarce future."