Ali 🐝 Anani, Brand Ambassador @beBee to my followers Apr 10, 2019 · 1 min read · 2.0K

Nature and Us on the Edge of Chaos

Nature and Us on the Edge of Chaos

Nature doesn’t trust us anymore. We have depleted it of many of its resources without having the capacity to understand the effect of our behaviors on the balance of nature. Depletion of fish resources, the emergence of pets and the permanent migration of birds to other parts of the world are signs of our actions.

It seems to me that the root cause of our actions is simply greed. The greed we observe in the stock markets is responsible for the distortion of stock markets and their sudden and unpredictable behaviors. We make these markets behave in unpredictable ways and we pay heavily for that. It is our imbalance that leads to the imbalance of nature. Not only we become chaotic in our behaviors, but may also lead to the chaotic behavior of nature. The signs are many such as the greenhouse effect, the extinction of some species, the pollution of our waters and the examples are too many to count them all.

Chaos leads to chaos till a system disrupts or self-organize. Self-organizing requires trust. It is not enough for two people to be close to connect and build healthy relationship if they mistrust each other. Fear of closeness shall prevail and the two people shall avoid talking to each other, exchange ideas or be interested in knowing each other. Nature is the same. It doesn’t trust us and has been fearful in building healthy relations with us. We have destroyed its interconnectedness.

Disruption may lead to the emergence of new evils. One known example is the rapid increase in slug and snail numbers in few countries. Another example is the campaign in China that aimed at eradicating four pests in China in 1958. These pests were mosquitoes, flies, rats, and sparrows. Our ignorance of understanding that we live in an interconnected world led to disastrous results. For example, the extermination of sparrows led to the explosion of locusts that ruined crops. Our short-sightedness is responsible for this behavior for two reasons. We know about the fragility that interconnectedness may create, but we still repeat the same mistake. But there is a wider lesson here. It is the distortion of seeing the harm without considering the benefit. People blindness lead people to see the harm of sparrows, but not their benefits. We tend to exaggerate harm as it is instantaneous, and subdue the benefits because of their delayed effects.

This distortion of seeing the harms of now and not the benefits of tomorrow has distanced us from nature and from each other.
Ali Anani

Disruption may lead to the emergence of new evils- cascading evils. In the sparrows’ example above the invasion of locusts lead to less crops and more famine. A small even today may grow up tomorrow because evils have their networks. Evils are interconnected and one evil leads to more evils tomorrow.

When humans fail to interconnect healthily, they create unforeseen evils that may grow out of proportion tomorrow. These evils infiltrate to nature and disrupts it. The benefits of rapid growth have blinded us from seeing the evils of distorting the balance and the interconnectedness of nature. This fact extends to human relation as the evil of exploiting humans as resources and depleting them of their energies, appetite to work and so disengaging them from work. The evil of exploiting nature may easily become a tendency to exploiting people. We pile evils on evils and the work environment becomes suffocating.

Can we self-organize to combat these evils when we lose the trust between us? We need to self-reflect on our actions before any real hope emerges.

#38 This is self-challenging to "we must also accept the responsibility to correct what we started as natural". People tend to blame circumstances and other people for their non-intended acts. It takes courage to correct for them if they are to stop the cascading effect of Murphy's Law.

+1 +1
Harvey Lloyd 2 d ago · #38

#37 Realizing the law of unintended consequences and murphy's law are cousins in reality is the first step. The second step is to realize that if they do exist as a matter of nature then we must also accept the responsibility to correct what we started as natural. But it is difficult to be disruptive if we also carry the responsibility of humanity also. By letting go of unintended consequences we can be disruptive in the marketplace.

We can't know the future but we can be responsible for it when we meet the challenges.

+1 +1

#36 I must admit that your wealth of knowledge is staggering. I love the way you link drama with your explanations. The sci-fi is an example of what I mean.
You baffled me with this comment for it has high quality, deep reasoning and unexpected surprise. You mentioned "The law of unintended consequences". I wish you were nearby to show you my hand-written notes. A very recent one reads consider writing a buzz about nondirectional intentions. I hear people say "it was not my intention to do so". Who is to blame? Maybe the emerging thoughts and results were never intended by the initiator. Your comment prompts me to write this buzz soon.

+1 +1
Harvey Lloyd 2 d ago · #36

#34 I recently watched a sci-fi series where a scientists created a time machine and used it to enhance his race. Through eliminating one thing in history he thought hindered his own. Another race. Everything went well for a few months. Then a dreaded disease came to his planet and home. It wiped out his entire family and his own existence. Turned out the race he destroyed brought an antibody into their race that kept the viruses at bay. The law of unintended consequences.

He spent hundreds of years redoing, destroying and eliminating history segments of people. He got to 99% back to where it was but always his own life and family never showed up.

So it is when we begin to tinker with policy and national/international issues. One move to the left or right will have impact both negative and/or positive, never perfection. Unfortunately various historical and current practices are creating non participants in the economic process. People in the hidden economy, and those who are working poor are not participating in the socioeconomic world being created. We should be alarmed. But we should not look to who is at fault.

Taking away greed will not solve these issues. Being in perfect balance with nature will not eliminate these issues. It will be a shadow concept of "things in common" that draw us back from the direction of identity groups.

Great discussion as always.

+1 +1

#33 Reading my posts alone will lose wealth of value without the integral comments such as yours my friend. A writer gets his main energy from comments that enrich him as well as the readers. To this I acknowledge your great contributions.
I published a e-book today on both slideshare and LinkedIn.

The book explains the complexity of management and you are so correct in your very reflective comment.


#32 I am taken by the quality of your comment. You nailed the issues perfectly well I am absorbing your supper-quality thought "The solution has to cut across culture and all socioeconomic structures. Nature and humans across all domains must coexist and solutions should be considered in these veins". I am speechless and fully in agreement.

+1 +1
Harvey Lloyd 3 d ago · #33

#30 Thank you for seeing the challenge in thinking as a broadening of the discussion. Your posts bring up components of a matrix of issues. Your thoughts open segways into the larger discussions we need more of in our humanity.

They are complex issues. My thought is to display the complexity and that no one thing is going to repair several decades of choices and there unintended consequences.

My frustration if you will is how politicians and media drive very narrow focused talking points. While the issue has very broad implications. If this frustration leaked through without description my apologies.

Your posts bring provocative issues before a group who wish to explore beyond the media. For this i thank you.

+1 +1
Harvey Lloyd 3 d ago · #32

#31 Great questions and again we are back to perspective. Many conversations along these lines are NIMBY (Not in my backyard). I am for some form of behavioral change in others but when it comes to my own i don't want to.

The solution has to cut across culture and all socioeconomic structures. Nature and humans across all domains must coexist and solutions should be considered in these veins.

When we focus upon the outcome only, which may be a great outcome, without considering the impact across domains we lose the original goal, humanities sustainability.

Climate change, carbon based vs renewables are having a devastating impact on our less fortunate humans. Attacking the socially labeled greedy is also having impact that most don't see. Makes for great TV but in action the subtle effects are less visible.

A large segment of our economy is not participating. Is it due to climate change, greed, missing opportunity or generational structures that we thought would help. I have difficulty that a problem that started in the 1930's and the generated behaviours, can be fixed through eliminating greed alone. This is a matrix whereby we must unwind the components to see how we are impacting humanity.

Attacking one or two components seems a bit challenging when we consider the 80+ years of changes in social, political and economic policies.

+1 +1