Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.98 AVERAGE
3.98 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
tense
medium-paced
challenging
informative
inspiring
One of those books where I can't help but shake the feeling I only really absorbed about half of what I read. That's the problem of reading
i. mostly on audiobook
ii. about climate change
I want to reread this one, but I say that about a lot of books I've read this year. Definitely dates itself -- lots of discussion about pop-sci books by Yuval Noah Harari, Naomi Klein, Steven Pinker, and others. I was expecting a neoliberal take on climate change from the intro but was surprised how game he was to take that system on. Probably the most level-headed take on climate change I've ever read.
i. mostly on audiobook
ii. about climate change
I want to reread this one, but I say that about a lot of books I've read this year. Definitely dates itself -- lots of discussion about pop-sci books by Yuval Noah Harari, Naomi Klein, Steven Pinker, and others. I was expecting a neoliberal take on climate change from the intro but was surprised how game he was to take that system on. Probably the most level-headed take on climate change I've ever read.
informative
medium-paced
challenging
dark
informative
sad
slow-paced
This book is different from others on climate change in that primarily centers around the question, “how much worse will it get?” But he considers the natural science settled— it is the social science, or the actions humans will yet take, that are unknown. He contemplates the story of climate change: what will humans do, if anything, how we will continue to internalize this crisis in the coming decades, and how will society change because of it.
Some interesting things David discusses are: the balance between hope and fear in rhetorical approaches to climate change without too deeply tempering alarm to sidestep denialist outrage; how humans’ cognitive frameworks don’t really allow for good ways of grappling with our own demise (cognitive dissonance and overconfidence in technocratic solutions); our elevation of certain narratives over others, like our proclivity to center tales of animal suffering rather than reckon with our own eminent suffering; emerging conceptions of climate liability, in the form of equal protection lawsuits against nations and corporations, which he predicts will be become more common; how the choice of procreation has always been a political tool for privileged classes; notions of purity and individual choice as a proffered strategy of neoliberalism; how despair, purposelessness, etc. will manifest in the human psyche and shape our morality and politics moving forward (e.g. fringe movements like eco-facism); and the likelihood of adaption and mitigation efforts.
Though it outlines the absolute devastation what could be ahead, for me, it ultimately reinforced that (1) nihilism does us no good—even the difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming would spare hundreds of millions of people’s lives. Ignorance or naive optimism about our responsibility for the climate (and those marginalized folks globally who are disparately impacted) aren’t useful either, but fatalism is equally bad. And, (2) the fact that climate change is anthropogenic should be actually be empowering rather than a source of hotly contested debate. Isn’t is better to know that we are the cause rather than an uncontrollable natural or supernatural force dooming us all? We have all the tools necessary to take action now, if we can mobilize globally.
Some interesting things David discusses are: the balance between hope and fear in rhetorical approaches to climate change without too deeply tempering alarm to sidestep denialist outrage; how humans’ cognitive frameworks don’t really allow for good ways of grappling with our own demise (cognitive dissonance and overconfidence in technocratic solutions); our elevation of certain narratives over others, like our proclivity to center tales of animal suffering rather than reckon with our own eminent suffering; emerging conceptions of climate liability, in the form of equal protection lawsuits against nations and corporations, which he predicts will be become more common; how the choice of procreation has always been a political tool for privileged classes; notions of purity and individual choice as a proffered strategy of neoliberalism; how despair, purposelessness, etc. will manifest in the human psyche and shape our morality and politics moving forward (e.g. fringe movements like eco-facism); and the likelihood of adaption and mitigation efforts.
Though it outlines the absolute devastation what could be ahead, for me, it ultimately reinforced that (1) nihilism does us no good—even the difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming would spare hundreds of millions of people’s lives. Ignorance or naive optimism about our responsibility for the climate (and those marginalized folks globally who are disparately impacted) aren’t useful either, but fatalism is equally bad. And, (2) the fact that climate change is anthropogenic should be actually be empowering rather than a source of hotly contested debate. Isn’t is better to know that we are the cause rather than an uncontrollable natural or supernatural force dooming us all? We have all the tools necessary to take action now, if we can mobilize globally.
informative
reflective
slow-paced
challenging
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
dark
hopeful
informative
medium-paced
informative
inspiring
sad
fast-paced