3. Communicating Knowledge: The Environmental Crisis and the Question of Responsibility

It seems that a natural revolution is approaching which could, quite possibly, take humanity out of the evolutionary process or reduce it to a shadow of its former potency. All signs point to a coming crisis which, for humanity, will be as metaphysical as it is physical. This section will examine the contemporary problems of understanding and communication facing the individual, government and industry. It will propose that the environmental problem we all face demands a new conception of responsibility, and the self which must offer itself as a vehicle for the expression of positive personal action and open communication of knowledge between our institutions, the individual at large and the naural world.

The crisis I mentioned above has been germinating since the late 15th century when Europeans first started making major inroads into exploration, world conquest and the creation of a taxonomic view of nature with the intention of mastering it and generating wealth. The Economic creed of progress that developed in the following centuries demanded scientific innovation and political infrastructure to support it, creating a situation whereby human knowledge became fractured into increasingly specialised fields of understanding while human production polluted the environment. By the 21st century we find society to be dominated bureaucratically and technologically, with the creed of progress and profit inculcated into the soul of the western man and his institutions. The complex political and technological nature of modern government and industry coupled with the quasi-religious insistence on maximal economic growth renders the contemporary institution incapable of swift and decisive action in matters which do not fall into clear and well worn categories; issues must have a clear mandate and infrastructure of their own already in place within the system in order to be dealt with effectively or at all. This renders the rapid reforms necessary to countermand the effects of global warming very difficult to realise.

Additionally, this bureaucratic and technological complexity renders critical engagement by the individual extremely difficult and, as a result, a large part of society feels insignificant and powerless with regard to the enormity of the socio-economic structure in which he or she lives. This results in a cynical social malaise which is masked by irrational consumerism and hyper-individualism. Communication between the fundamental elements of society, crucial as it is for the sustainable functioning of humanity as a whole, seems farther from reach than ever before. Indeed, the very way in which we question responsibility itself expresses this fracturing of state, industry and the individual. In order to confront the contemporary global issues we face effectively, we will need some way of unifying or, at the very least, mediating these elements of society so that production, governance and the individual can communicate efficiently and function as a sustainable part of the natural cycle.

Consider the modern University. This institution has, since the late 19th century, positioned itself as the mediator between the institutions of mankind; it establishes the criteria for credibility and transforms individuals into policy makers, professionals, educators, and CEOs. The University collects the diverse scientific knowledge which has always been key in maximising production and produces the economic theories which govern the worlds workers; it defines the judicial standards that hold us responsible for our actions––or inaction––and develops the social theories through which we understand ourselves. It also gathers and interprets the complex data regarding green house gas emissions and other pertinent environmental issues. The University is positioned to mediate knowledge in a way that no other institution is capable of. I suggest that the 21st century will offer the University an unprecedented opportunity to redefine itself as a medium through which knowledge may be communicated across and between the diverse elements of society. This will demand an evolution in our understanding of responsibility which can no longer function as introverted, categorical fields of blame, possession and power that exist within the framework of Instrumental Reason.

Responsibility must become an expression of understanding across human endeavour; it must demand knowledge and be obliged to express it. This concept of responsibility depends on communication for its effectiveness. Although it is clear that the individual is the fundamental unit out of which society is built, we must realise that the individual permeates the institution itself and therefore cannot be separated from it. It is with this in mind that I suggest the University come down from its elite position and engage in a process which continually reaches out across diverse fields of study and experience to communicate knowledge in a way that inspires the individual––regardless of institutional affiliation or social strata––to think and act in a way that engages humanity within nature and that understands the interconnected nature of the world.

Indeed, some positive steps are being taken in this regard. Some universities and other educational institutions are offering community outreach programs; the curriculum in some elementary and secondary schools is beginning to include natural and critical studies where, until recently, science and mathematics have been dominant. We must ensure that this trend continues to grow, and rapidly. By assuring that everyone has access to the knowledge required to understand, on a basic level at least, the diverse political and technological elements that constitute our modern condition, the individual may begin to realise where his or her true power lies. Given the appropriate critical tools which allow the individual to understand and dismantle the psychological forces that have, until now, manufactured material desire, he or she may be able to affect positive change that begins on a personal level; we might begin to take down the metaphysical boundaries of categorical thought that divide humanity from itself and separate mankind from nature. The individual, both at large and within the context of the institution must, as a matter of course and in the of best faith, continually demand and give knowledge that extends understanding so that it may be expressed as action which gives rather than takes. Although it is unclear whether or not the human species will continue to thrive on this planet, the adoption of a new, evolving conception of responsibility––which expresses understanding and communicates knowledge via policy making, industrial practice, education and consumption––might just allow us to redefine ourselves as a sustainable part of the natural world before nature herself removes us from it.

READING:
1. Carolyn Merchant: The Death of Nature
2. Michel Serres: Le Contrat Naturel
3. Thorsten Veblen: The Theory of the Leisure Class
4. Max Weber: The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation
5. Charles Taylor: The Malaise of Modernity