"We cannot innovate ourselves out of this mess." Do you agree?

Challenge Question.jpg

"Stretch and challenge" tasks require you to read a newspaper article and give your opinions on it, backed up with reasons. These tasks are designed to be more challenging than other activities on the Student Hub.

In an article for the Guardian newspaper, Peter Sutoris says he does not think technology is the answer to the climate crisis. He writes:

"This moment calls for humility – we cannot innovate ourselves out of this mess...our society has come to believe that technology is the solution...the problem with this narrative is that it focuses on the symptoms, not the causes of environmental decay."

Read Peter's full article here.

  • What from the article do you agree with? Why?
  • What from the articles do you disagree with? Why?
  • What questions would you put to the author? And what do you think he would say?

Extra challenge: Do you think it is possible to, in Peter's words, "change the collective mindset of a civilisation"?

Comments (66)

  • British Council.jpg healthy_antelope | Beit Hanoun Prep Girls A School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    01 Oct 2021

    "How does this look in practice? Changing the collective mindset of civilization requires a shift in values. It means teaching our children humility and interdependence, rather than vanity and individuality. It means changing our relationship with consumption, breaking the spell of advertising, manufactured needs and status. It means political organization, demand generation. On a policy that sees beyond the nation-state, and beyond the age of present living generations - Wales has already begun, with the Welfare of Future Generations Act"
    I agree with this completely. From my point of view, if you want to take a step to solve a social or environmental problem, start with the mentality that your civilization was on, as it was the main cause of the problem, and as for the mentality that our civilization was on during the increase in carbon emissions, it is "We will make this world Easier with our technological boom, which will be considered a gift to the earth.” But it is really just an embodiment of killing the simplicity and humility that was our nature and our environment on it. We thought that if we did this, our lives would be easier, but in fact, I can say that we chose nothing but our comfort and ease of dealing with some of the things of life, but for a time the end will come and the end is approaching, if we change the collective mentality of civilization, we will achieve a new goal in our confrontation against the climate because we We built our civilization anew with noble and humble values ​​that think about the environment before thinking about human well-being

    1. British Council.jpg bright_grape | Mymensingh Girls Cadet College | Bangladesh
      healthy_antelope's comment 19 Oct 2021

      You said, changing the collective mindset of civilization requires a shift in values but how can you shift values when people don't change their styles or mindsets and say that our 'forefathers have done the work, why shall we stop?' How can you make these types of people divert?

      1. katie.jpg Katie @ Topical Talk
        bright_grape's comment 20 Oct 2021

        This is a great question, bright_grape. How would you answer it?

  • British Council.jpg healthy_antelope | Beit Hanoun Prep Girls A School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    02 Oct 2021

    Our society has come to believe that technology is the solution
    I neither fully agree nor completely oppose this opinion, as we as human beings see that we have exploited technology in a way that makes our lives easier in terms of dealing with daily habits in order for people to obtain well-being, and currently most of what causes environmental pollution is modern technology, where most of it depends on fossil fuels as an energy source, the human preference for the noisy polluted life over the life of villages and countryside "this is the effect of modern technology on humans", air pollution occurs when harmful or excessive amounts of gases such as carbon dioxide are introduced "due to the industrial revolution", and other effects , the side of technology, this is the thing that makes me not encourage to take technology as a reliable solution in our face of the climate, where technology from my point of view was one of the main factors that cause the rise in the number of carbon, so how will we use it as a complete and reliable solution in all matters in order to fix the corruption caused by technology in our environment
    There is also a little inconsistency with this sentence, even if I consider technology a major factor that causes high carbon emissions, but I also do not deny that technology will make it easier for us to face, inventions and innovations from my point of view are the basis of the solution, and when they are invented of course they will be used Technology, you may think that there is a contradiction in my words in the beginning and now, but I say briefly
    "Technology is not a solution that you can adopt in order to be able to solve the climate crisis , rather, it is the basis for starting work, but this does not mean that the technology will be fully adopted, because we really do not know what its use will bring us from my point of view , the technology is ambiguous that takes years to understand a device that they invented , for years or decades, that is, we will use technology as a secondary solution. As for the main solution, it is to change the mentality that our civilization was following. My friend, if you change the mentality that your civilization was on during the occurrence of this climate crisis, you must change it because it was the cause, when Change the mentality of your civilization to the opposite, then you will see the solution applied alone before your eyes

  • Ormiston-Bushfield-logo-250x250.jpg industrious_hen | Ormiston Bushfield Academy B | United Kingdom
    02 Oct 2021

    This is an extremely difficult article to pick apart.I'd say at first glance it is quite a pessimistic way of looking at the climate crisis-But I feel there is definitely some truth in it. Scientists are putting so much time into climate change and how to help/stop it,but are there just some messes we can't fix with science? In this circumstance I'd say mostly no. This is not to say that we can just continue with our planet-destructive ways and just wait for some new invention to turn it all around:it's a fine balance. We need to do all we can to stop climate change,such as recycle,don't use plastic,stop wasting food/water,but some things may not be able to be reversed by human effort alone.We may need the innovation and bright minds to help turn around the catastrophe.
    To say that “our society has come to believe that technology is the solution.” is (I feel) a very one sided way of thinking:technology alone most likely will not be the solution to the climate crisis but (as said in paragraph one) will be a large contributing factor.``the problem with this narrative is that it focuses on the symptoms, not the causes of environmental decay." This is tricky to understand for me,but what I gather from it is that what Peter Sutoris is saying is we are focusing too much on how to fix byproduct issues like sea levels rising or spontaneous wildfires,And in all honesty,I agree with this-but only to an extent. Let's take wildfires as an example:there are wildfires because of global warming,there is global warming because of excess co2 emissions,there are excess co2 emissions because we burn fossil fuels.I would say that all of those are issues being already addressed,and that everything is a chain of causes and each need to be dealt with,which they are.
    In conclusion,this article remains quite a depressed way of seeing climate change,I understand that it isn't a perky subject,and remaining happy may be seen as not caring,But there is still hope.In the words of Greta Thunberg: “I don't want hope.I don’t want you to be hopeful.I want you to panic,and act is if the house is on fire.Because it is. We need to act,but how are we supposed to with no vision of hope for what we see in the future?

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      industrious_hen's comment 04 Oct 2021

      Is it fair to say Peter is being pessimistic? Or is he concerned about the outcomes of trying to fix climate change through technology?

  • British Council.jpg appreciative_pear | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    02 Oct 2021

    I agree with my article on the Anthropocene because the Anthropocene is a new geological age and impact on humans where humans became a dominant force in shaping the natural environment and became prosperous and economical

  • British Council.jpg caring_personality | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    03 Oct 2021

    Self_deve lopment is the first thing that a person should do,and then start developing what is around him,but everything has high prices. When you want to develop your self,you must face defficulties and risks and you must lose some of the things that you owned, and this is the development of the world. As the develops ,we lose some thing, for example,when we built factories. Air pollution and it is true that development has become a personal property like cars, but the idea of believing that we are able to solve everything with development and technology, this is not true. Scientists can find a vaccine forit , should let people die and do what ever they want? This is not true at this time should they let people did and do as they please? This is not true at this time. There must be good political leadership and life has shown that technology is not substitute for everything . I want to ask the author question . How much does evolution represent in our lives ? I just think that because there are things that you have to solve on your frind technology wont come to solve this problem and such things and many more don't depend of technology.

  • British Council.jpg bright_conversation | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    03 Oct 2021

    I agree with Peter in every thing he said . because prevention is worth a pound of cure. We can't just invent some machines to clean up after our mess .some of them cannot be cleaned .that's why we should be careful to avoid making serious problems . as he said that 80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity is located within territories inhabited by indigenous peoples who cares about the environment.

    1. British Council.jpg active_fact | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
      bright_conversation's comment 08 Oct 2021

      Because they are the indigenous people Who bring the largest percentage of biological diversity 'they are the most effective in caring and preserving the environment and making them the most controlling in reducing serious environmental in reducing serious environmental problems and this is the most important thing that distinguishes them help them to obtain healthy biological environment free of problems

  • British Council.jpg poetic_coconut | Sylhet Cadet College | Bangladesh
    03 Oct 2021

    I agree with the point that “ Even if the technologies on which we pin our hopes for the future deliver as expected and do not lead to much collateral damage – both of which are huge assumptions”. To introduce zero carbon emission technology in the whole world including third world regions, it will push more funding and management of such resources that may take another century. Then it would be pretty late to come back in the position we are in today leading to a catastrophe. So introducing newer technology for combating climate change is a way but depending on it totally will push the situation more worse as it is uncertain and vague.
    I disagree with the point that it focuses on the symptoms, not the causes of environmental decay. Technology can work as a point of stopping environmental decay such as carbon capture plant or oil filtering bacterias. But we have to remember technological innovation must not be stopped it may take time to introduce far better technology to combat climate change so innovation should be motivated as well as working out practical solutions like awareness, Consuming local and seasonal products (forget strawberries in winter), Selecting fish from sustainable fishing, Bringing reusable shopping bags and avoiding products with excessive plastic packaging.
    I want to say to the author that having an idea of infinite growth has caused the society to grow, to bring out new innovations and ideas. So what do the writer think is having infinite growth good or bad?
    In my perspective the writer would have said having infinite growth mindset is not bad but we have to be careful that it doesnot put the environment in danger or cause any negative outcome.
    Extra challenge: Yes it is possible to change the collective mindset of a civilization. A century back Black people were treated as slaves. But now we have civilized ourselves realizing that what it means to be human. Education and social upbringing of a children can teach a child values and ethics. So to change ourselves as a civilization we need to put forward our social and cultural ideals promoting various organizations like “well being of future generations act” and movements related to that collective ideology.

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      poetic_coconut's comment 04 Oct 2021

      I think these answers shows great maturity and awareness of the world as it is now, and in the past. Well done.

  • British Council.jpg faithful_aspect | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    03 Oct 2021

    Yes, I agree with Peter's article As he addressed several logical and realistic points, namely that the problem does not lie in technology, but lies in people's minds and their wrong use. He gave us an example of the Corona pandemic and how man was unable to invent a technology that would limit this epidemic. I ask the author this question Is there another reference to elicit honest inks other than the Guardian? How do you think, author, how do we begin to influence people's minds and convince them that they are the cause of environmental problems? Finally, I think Peter's article will change the collective mentality of civilization As long as it deals with facts and is published in a newspaper that is credible to people Thank you

  • British Council.jpg honest_watermelon | El Rafie A | Egypt
    04 Oct 2021

    On my opinion :
    We can innovate ourselves out of the mess by determenation and resolve
    I don't talk that is very easy, but I took we can do this
    Trust yourself and you will succes in that easily

  • British Council.jpg phenomenal_orange | Rajshahi Cadet College | Bangladesh
    04 Oct 2021

    I'd go along with that. But I am adding something some more theories.

    An international group of scientists asserts that we cannot depend on technology to converge climate targets – instead, wealthy countries must change their lifestyles to dramatically reduce emissions and avoid climate breakdown.
    Models attempt to predict future temperatures and climate based on current data and simulations; they can follow a variety of pathways to different outcomes based on our choices now.
    Put bluntly, these approaches may not be adequate to address the crisis we face. We’re gambling the future of humanity and the rest of life on Earth because of the assumption that GDP must continue to grow in rich countries.
    From this discussion it is crystal clear that technology cannot be the only way to get rid of climate change. Rather we need to take joint initiative to really innovate ourselves out of this mess.

  • British Council.jpg appreciative_pear | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    04 Oct 2021

    I agree with the point that rebuilding our relationship with our planet does not mean abandoning the many achievements of our civilization. Some innovations in technology can help us address the symptoms of multiple environmental crises. I do not agree with him that our civilization is backed by extractivism, the belief that the Earth is ours to exploit, and the irrational idea of ​​endless growth within a region. limited

  • British Council.jpg blissful_music | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    04 Oct 2021

    I agree with the writer in We must contend with the harsh reality that our civilization, for all its accomplishments, is deeply flawed. It will take a reimagining of who we are to truly solve this crisis.

    I do not agree with the author that technology will contribute to climate change because some countries cannot bear the cost of some of this technology (carbon sequestration plant) as countries from the third world that are full of poverty and hunger, and these costs will increase the size of the disaster for them.

    The question I will pose to the author is that: Rebuilding our relationship with our planet does not mean abandoning the many achievements of our civilization. Some of our technological innovations can help us address the symptoms of the multiple environmental crisis. But addressing the causes means abandoning some of the assumptions on which our current society is built: endless growth, exploitation of the natural environment and species, and this brings us back to an idea, I believe, that we cannot change the collective mentality of civilization, and it is better that we solve the causes of the environmental crisis and not wait for the symptoms to appear and then Start solving it Do you agree in this view???

    The additional challenge is that the collective mentality of civilization cannot be changed because the human mentality differs from one society to another according to the different customs, traditions and religion followed in each society.

  • British Council.jpg humble_piano | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    04 Oct 2021

    It's a slightly different article. It's not easy to understand what I agree with and what I don't. I think mostly it's beautiful, but what I don't agree with is that humility is not always the solution to problems. Sometimes technology can solve some but not all of the problems. That doesn't mean I don't agree that humility is a solution. Some problems mean, for example, that scientists have devoted all their time to research and experiments, but not all problems can be solved by research. They can be humility, as Peter said. We must think long enough to find the right solution. And I say let's make us the ones who overcome the circumstances, not the circumstances overcome us. Now it's time for the questions I'm going to ask Peter:

    1- Do you think that all people think that technology is the solution to all problems?

    Peter: Yes, I think so because the world has become a new geologist.


    2- Can we engineer the earth?

    Peter: No, I think there is a problem with this novel that it focuses on the symptoms and not the causes of environmental degradation.

    3- What is the crisis facing the world from your perspective?

    Peter: A cultural and political crisis because people think that technology is the solution to all problems.

    Extra activity:
    I also think it's possible that Peter's article can change collective mentality of civilization because as soon as I read it, my mentality changed and I was able to look at life with another perspective and also see how the mentality of people has changed from ancient centuries until our time.

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      humble_piano's comment 05 Oct 2021

      Well done for creatively putting yourself into Peter's shoes, I think he would certainly answer along those lines!

  • British Council.jpg optimistic_market | Jabalia Prep Girls A School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    04 Oct 2021

    Negatives of technology… Technology is evolving every day, and the more it advances and develops, the more it takes control of our lives. According to Segal, who says that we shop, work, play, love, search for information, communicate with each other and sometimes with the whole world through the Internet, we go We use the Internet more than ever, but it seems that people are only looking at the benefits of technology, ignoring its negatives, and according to the words of Segal, he said: People now do not think about the location of their homes, so it does not matter if it is in a large mansion or in a secluded suburb as long as it picks up the TV signal that makes A person enters the subconscious stage. Segal believes that when a person stares at the TV screen, his mind stops thinking and enters a stage of unconsciousness and lack of awareness.

    As for the Internet, Segal said that this innovation led to a decrease in natural social behaviors and turned to computer screens, so people replaced the face-to-face interview with their friends in cafes and restaurants and replaced it with electronic letters, and it is also possible to find people at any time, they are just a click away button.

    One of the negative aspects of technology is the elimination of human ability to think and analyze. For example, the news that we read on the Internet, due to its abundance, we read it and may be affected by it for a moment, then quickly ignore it and do not take time to think about it or even try to know its impact on our lives. . From my point of view, technology also has its advantages: facilitating access to information, as it has become very easy to access any information at any time and anywhere, and this thing has become possible thanks to modern technologies such as smart phones and the Internet that allow access to a huge amount of information. Information easily through the use of the Internet, where sites such as YouTube contain a myriad of content that may be used for entertainment or learning. Electronic, mobile phones, video conferencing, text messaging applications, social networking, etc., where modern communication technology tools have made it easier to communicate with companies while searching for jobs, etc. It is also possible to communicate with other cultures and make friends using mobile phone and video chat applications.

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      optimistic_market's comment 05 Oct 2021

      Can you link what you have said to what Peter has said in his article?

  • British Council.jpg champion_seed | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    04 Oct 2021

    Technology is not the radical solution to this crisis, and if we go back to the Stone Age from the beginning of human life, we find that there is no problem or crisis of the modern problems that we are currently exposed to. Therefore, several questions appear here, including:
    1- What is the first problem that we encountered in the development of human life?
    2- Could the climate crisis be man-made, and if so, what is the solution?
    3- Can we abandon all technology and live a primitive life devoid of development and technology?

  • British Council.jpg honest_watermelon | El Rafie A | Egypt
    04 Oct 2021

    Some times I think that the hardest things is innovating myself out of the mess, but I discover that very easy by some determenation and resolve
    Any default is easy to avoid it, if you near to your god
    Trust yourself and you will succes

  • British Council.jpg excellent_snow | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    05 Oct 2021

    I do not think that technology is the only solution to solve our problems. Technology cannot solve the problems of poverty or the large disparity in income rates and others. The problem is complete in the belief of many people that technology is the only solution, and this is a huge mistake. Technology is just a tool or an auxiliary factor, for example, poverty? The first question: What are the causes of this problem? People don't care about others, they care about themselves The second question: How can technology solve this problem? It does not solve the problem of poverty. It will not employ people. We need to build society first and build people before technology. Many countries have advanced technology and peoples are lagging in which sociologists and text scholars come forward

  • British Council.jpg lovable_skill | Sylhet Cadet College | Bangladesh
    05 Oct 2021

    I agree on the statement that we possess a belief that the earth is ours to exploit. We, the human race have been using the nature from the beginning of civilization on our favor; very less thought about its ability to support us. Hence we have been continuously destroying its balance for which the climate had been reacting sometimes very weird to us. Very late we come to realize our mistakes, but instead of trying to stop doing them we are trying to do more and cover them up. We have taken the earth as our personal item to exploit which is the root to environmental degradation.
    Peter Sutoris placed the concept of thinking technology as a solution wrongly. Technology is obviously the solution to many of our problems but there’s a saying that nothing is good in excess. And we humans are doing the excess of technological use which the nature can’t bear actually. We should consider nature as our friend to understand its ability to support us. Technology can’t be the only emerging factor in climate change, humans’ individual approach is very much necessary, but the author’s way of delivering made it go in the wrong way. Maybe he doesn’t want to think technology playing a role in changing the worse to something better.
    “Human needs or excess use of technology is responsible for the rapid increase in our control over the Earth?” I guess Peter Sutoris would say being able to technological blessings our needs increased for which we acquired rapid control over earth.
    Extra Challenge: Do you think it is possible to, in Peter's words, “ Change the collective mindset of a civilization?”
    When s group of people discuss a topic the people around them also become interested in that, it is the normal human psychology. After reading the article of the author I too had many doubts in my mind, and they were fighting each other in my head. So, I had to think deep to come out to a conclusion on the writing. But from the writing I got introduced to a lot new facts. So, when it will be done amongst people it will obviously have an impact which can be said to change the collective mindset of a civilization.

  • British Council.jpg patient_iceberg | Sylhet Cadet College | Bangladesh
    05 Oct 2021

    I agree that "Our civilisation is underpinned by extractivism, a belief that the Earth is ours to exploit, and the nonsensical idea of infinite growth within a finite territory".
    This type of ideology is completely senseless in my opinion. The belief alone is a great cause for climate change. Technology plays a role in both making our lives easier and causing damage to the environment.
    While it is true that some technologies seem ominous to people, it is also evident that technology evolves faster than anything.
    Today, there are technologies that make life easier for a price e.g. Carbon emission, Ozone layer damage.
    Tomorrow, there is hope for even better technology that makes life easy AND saves from the side effects.
    Besides, there is progress already in this sector. For example, Recycling of cigarettes butts to make toys and manure,
    using river algae to reduce carbon from the atmosphere, recycling carbon to replenish underground oil, etc.

    Although technology is a hope, relying completely on technology is a huge mistake. We also need to be sensible about what we do.
    Newer technologies only are not enough. Consciousness of what we do with technology is a must.

    I am practically at a loss for what I disagree with. The only thing which is hardly close to that is "But the problem with this narrative is that it focuses on the symptoms, not the causes of environmental decay".
    The technologies mentioned in the article go well with this narration, like electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel, but there are innovations that focus on the causes.
    For example capturing CO2 and sending it deep inside the earth before it even reaches the atmosphere. This not only saves the environment from carbon dioxide, but also increases underground oil over time.
    Although this type of technologies are not mainstream yet, I believe that this is a huge step forward.

    I want to ask the author of the article, if he thinks that people will really change their mindset towards this. People hold on to their beliefs.
    Sometimes, they will even do crazy things to establish those. There are examples of this, like the "Satidah" ritual and many other superstitious beliefs have been eradicated.
    I am not too certain about these things and believe that it is a difficult challenge.

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      patient_iceberg's comment 05 Oct 2021

      Excellent response to this article, patient_iceberg. Are there some kinds of technologies that are making it harder for people to change their mindset about climate change?

      1. British Council.jpg patient_iceberg | Sylhet Cadet College | Bangladesh
        Tom @ Topical Talk's comment 13 Oct 2021

        Some of the most useful technologies are responsible for this. For example, fossil fuel is being used in countless places. But it causes continuous emission of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, which are both greenhouse gases. As such, people will generally find it hard to believe in technology as it is already behind one of the major sources of climate change.

  • British Council.jpg convivial_vegetable | Beit Hanoun Prep Girls A School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    05 Oct 2021

    Peter's article is what I agree with because the role of technology in solving climate crises: Many people feel fear and uncertainty about the future of our planet and the possibility of its surface turning into a "barren land" as sea levels continue to rise due to climate change
    And with more forms of climate-friendly technology under development, confusion in the coal and energy-intensive infrastructure industries is likely to continue. And as more funding becomes available through initiatives consistent with the Paris Agreement, we can expect further developments in favor of green infrastructure as efforts intensify to mitigate the effects of climate change.
    We can invent ourselves to get out of this mess by: In addition to the measures being taken to mitigate the effects, there is also a growing need to confront the consequences of climate change. Due to the risk of exposure to severe weather, and the presence of longer-term changes and diversity in weather patterns due to global warming, adaptation projects aim to strengthen the resilience of critical buildings and infrastructure (such as transportation), and primarily local communities, to cope with climate change.
    Problems it may cause: Scientists are looking for ways to modify the Earth's environment in order to control global warming through the new science known as "climate engineering".

    One way to do this is to simply reflect more sunlight off the Earth, i.e. changing the Earth's reflectivity or the amount of light reflected off the planet.

    This can be done using a large amount of flexible space reflectors floating in orbit around the planet.

    Alternatively, several types of "stratospheric mist" can be blasted into the upper atmosphere to reflect some of the light back into space.

  • British Council.jpg free_river | Faujdarhat Cadet College | Bangladesh
    05 Oct 2021

    I agree with the Point that'" This is a crisis of culture and politics" Yes in many case we can see that people have to shift their places of ancestors only for the reason of climate change .They have to adapt a new culture and food habits and more .When it is a matter of political issue it seems like putting oil into the burning fire and the world has seen it. The part i disagree with is it focuses on that it is not a crisis of science and technology and the reason for it is in many underdeveloped and developing countries we can see that though their political issues are okay and their culture is still okay but the matter of fact is they do not possesses the advanced technologies like developed countries. they only are lagging behind in the climate issues that they are not capable to make such technology or buy those from the developed countries. in many cases of climate crisis technology plays a great role and we have to say it and believe it.

    My question to Peter is
    IN CASE OF POOR COUNTRIES ISN'T TECHNOLOGY IS THE CRISIS NOW A DAYS???
    :Yes that can be but we have to think in our mind that if we can change our mindset the developing countries might get help but at first they have to raise their voice and for that they have to overcome the change in cultural and political issues and then they will have a voice to speak for themselves .
    Extra challenge: Yes it is possible to change the collective mindset of a civilization. Peoples are a way advanced now but still many of them are trying to establish their century old believes and norms . matter of fact is people are breaking the chains and coming up .(Movements like #Metoo , Black lives matter).so the reason behind this is known to all of us that is education and valuing others opinion and socialization. But there is a but that is it is a time lengthy process and quite difficult.

  • Cheam Common logo spectacular_peak | Cheam Common Junior Academy | United Kingdom
    05 Oct 2021

    I do agree as it started of as a thing that was natural and it has stayed as something that IS natural

  • Cheam Common logo chatty_perspective | Cheam Common Junior Academy | United Kingdom
    05 Oct 2021

    I do not agree because if all the people around the world help to solve the problem will help slow the problem down.

  • British Council.jpg generous_hurricane | Joypurhat Girls' Cadet College | Bangladesh
    05 Oct 2021

    I have to say that this is one of the most controversial article I have ever read. Different people have different opinions. But my take on the first question which is what part I disagree on the article is: Peter said, "Even if the technologies on which we pin our hopes for the future deliver as expected and do not lead to much collateral damage – both of which are huge assumptions – they will not have fixed our mindsets. This is a crisis of culture and politics, not of science and technology." I have a different opinion on this one. People start inventing a technology for a problem or disaster after it ha already caused it damage. So, ultimately rather than solving the problem they are just clearing the aftermath. The answer to climate change disasters are 'preventive measures' beforehand and also 'precautions'. Peter also said that it is social and cultural crisis not of science and technology. But actually, the world ha not yet advanced that much to take preventive measures beforehand with technology. there are still vacancy of innovative manpower. So, technology and innovations also have crisis in this era: yet again it is not the solution to every problem.
    Secondly, what part of the article I agree on:" our chaotic response showed that technological prowess is no substitute for good political leadership. We must face up to the harsh reality that for all its achievements, our civilisation is deeply flawed. It will take a reimagination of who we are to truly solve this crisis." I agree with this since, our civilisation is actually flawed. As I have aid before, technology is not the answer to everything. If a society is unable to take preventive measures themselves or change their mindset then they'll lag behind. Humility is ofcourse necessary but as well as self awareness, innovative thinking and problem solving skills. Technology can only do one part of the work, the rest of the work has to be done by the people by changing their attitude and behavior about certain things. We know when we nurture a tree with love and care it grows to give lots of fruits in the future. Its also similar in this case. this is our planet earth, our climate, so its our duty to keep it in a good condition at present and for the future.
    And my question to the author would be, 'can you give some ideas about some innovative ideas which will help prevent future climate change disasters?"

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      generous_hurricane's comment 05 Oct 2021

      A strongly-argued response to this article, generous_hurricane. You have taken a balanced approach which shows good listening, well done!

  • British Council.jpg determined_deer | Beit Hanoun Prep Girls A School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    05 Oct 2021

    Article I agree with: But the problem with this novel is that it focuses on the symptoms and not the causes of environmental degradation, even if the technologies on which we attach our hopes for the future progress as expected and do not lead to much collateral damage, and both are huge assumptions, they will not have reformed our mentalities. This is a crisis of culture and politics, not a crisis of science and technology.

    I do not agree with the article: It is no coincidence that up to 80% of the remaining biodiversity in the world is placed within the lands inhabited by indigenous peoples, because I think that it is exaggerated in what he mentioned, which is 80% because biodiversity is found in all countries and regions and not those inhabited by indigenous peoples as it is Focus on biodiversity through science and technology even in many countries that are not inhabited by indigenous peoples.

    I would like to ask the author: I mentioned in the article (which is that dealing with operations on the scale of our planet requires humility, not arrogance) What is the concept of humility and arrogance to you?

    * I think that it is not possible to change the collective mentality of civilization at once, because that is not possible, but if we start with our children and instill in them the values ​​and ideals that develop in them the preservation of their environment and their climate, for example: If we ask a small child to say, “Do not pick the flower” and convince him that it is beautiful and that it is The atmosphere will rise, and he will grow up believing that he does not cut down trees because they are useful, and another example: Instead of throwing garbage, we help him recycle it with something useful. With these convincing methods, we will be able to create a generation that cares about preserving the environment.

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      determined_deer's comment 07 Oct 2021

      Well done for giving your own opinion backed up with reasons, evidence and analogies.

  • British Council.jpg adventurous_cloudberry | Rafah Prep Girls B | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    05 Oct 2021

    The article contains a lot of information and the climate crisis has become the most popular among problems and everyone is working to solve it technologically. I do not agree with the idea of ​​solving it technologically. We can work to solve the problem without using technology for it because technology has a negative impact regardless of its positive effects and inventions about The way of technology We are waiting for similar and new inventions to help solve the climate problem. Thus, we are waiting for our planet to be destroyed, and this is a disturbing thing when thinking about it. Let us think about working on the basis of these problems (causes). Let us reduce them. In my community, there is the problem of water pollution caused by humans by 65%, and the problem of waste is also caused by people for a large percentageIn causing this, this makes us link the causes of those human-related problems. A person can solve them through himself by separating household waste into organic waste and plastic waste. Organic waste can be placed in agricultural lands and thus decomposes benefit from soil and plastic is placed in containers and not next to containers and it is a widespread phenomenon in My society, what I mean by these examples is that solutions are in the hands of the human being in a large proportion, and also technology has a role in reducing problems, but we do not have to wait for technology inventions, because when we wait for the perfect invention, our planet may be destroyed. Climate change.

  • British Council.jpg honest_watermelon | El Rafie A | Egypt
    05 Oct 2021

    Someone tell me that innovation outselves from the mess is very difficult and maybe it is impossible thing
    That time I believe his words and sentences
    But now I believe that is very easy by some of determenation and resolve
    I comminucate with him to reach this idea to him
    Trust by yourself and you will succes
    Believe in your personality and you will succes
    Go away from the negative friends and you will succes
    Keep calm and listen to all advices that talked to you and you will succes

  • British Council.jpg genuine_memory | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    06 Oct 2021

    I do not agree that technology is the only solution to solve our problems. Technology can solve some problems and others cannot
    There are people who object to my words and say that it is our only hope for solving our problems. Well, let us suppose that it is the only solution. So, can you solve the problems of poverty, famine and epidemics such as the Corona epidemic?????
    The answer is no no no.
    But I have a solution which is:
    They meet sociologists and psychologists, for example: if the poor education is one of the reasons for the increase in poverty rates as a result of unemployment (an employer will not hire a person who does not understand this required specialization)
    Psychology will tell us that the generation for my present has reduced its ability to memorize things because it is not needed, and its ability to focus and memorize has decreased due to the spread of social networks that do not need to quickly read and focus on short lines.
    Here comes the role of technology: it gives information and short lectures that the student can listen to. It also gives students information and answers to their questions and can explain to them what they do not understand.

  • British Council.jpg loved_vegetable | El Rafie A | Egypt
    06 Oct 2021

    I agree with Peter Sutores. The world must agree and keep one hand, regardless of whether they are poor countries or rich countries, because the climate crisis cannot be solved by one country. Technology will help the world in the climate crisis. It will help, but it will not solve it.

  • Bruntcliffe-logo-250x250.jpg openminded_history | Bruntcliffe Academy | United Kingdom
    06 Oct 2021

    I do not agree because in the future tech will solve our problems like medical and software

  • British Council.jpg healthy_antelope | Beit Hanoun Prep Girls A School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    06 Oct 2021

    I agree with this point, he actually expressed human greed with only two lines, but he actually opened up several points for us to think about,He indicated to us that our human greed made us take advantage of our surroundings and our environment wrongly , he has corrupted man more than he did for the benefit of the earth, he saw technology and used it as a political race. Here, man proves that he wants to produce, but does not want to give the environment , Where, according to my point of view, I see that the greatest concentration in inventions is polluting the environment , as for the benefits to the environment, I cannot say that they are many, Where I wanted to do a search for environmentally beneficial inventions invented by Japan and South Korea, I did not find much, although Korea and Japan have a very big technological boom
    And the idea of ​​endless growth is a completely wrong idea that our world follows. We are not in a race to increase the number of births to this percentage , If you really see the rise and fall of births as a race, stop its rise and focus on the current generation, educate it, take advantage of its skills, appreciate its thinking, do not obliterate its philosophy, But the exact opposite happens. In countries with weak economies, one of which is the two states of Palestine, specifically Gaza City, the number of citizens is 2 million on a land area of ​​365 square kilometers,now, Gaza is ranked as the most densely populated city in the world, but do not think that the economy is high because our number is large, Rather, our economy is not sufficient to meet the citizens’ food needs and citizens’ pensions. Also, there is no work and poverty everywhere ,However, the number of births is rising every year, and this will not help us with the climate , For example, individual cars, the use of fossil fuels to provide electrical energy, a large percentage of individuals throw leaves on the ground, burn waste, cut trees and other environmentally harmful actions!!!!!!! In short, focus on your current generation. Do not think about procreation and reproduction when you have not even built a good present for your current generation.

  • skillful_theory | Wisdom Consultancy | Turkey
    06 Oct 2021

    Something I don't understand about his objection to the way the world is trying to solve the climate crisis is the fact that he does not include a solution, or a way for us to solve the climate crisis without technology. At this point, so many things on our planet have advanced because of technology, that if you look at it, even he seems not to be able to find a solution that does not involve technology. So I was wondering, why comment when you seem unable to find an idea, or a suggestion yourself?

  • British Council.jpg balanced_situation | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    06 Oct 2021

    I do not agree. We can innovate and rise from this chaos. First, you should examine your life, which is the most challenging step. Second, write down the successes. Take a pen and paper and write down all the things you accomplished. You do not have to reveal what you wrote to anyone. And not for the present. Finally, take important bold decisions, and with determination and hope, and not despair, from the first step that fails, you will rise.

  • British Council.jpg lovely_groundhog | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    06 Oct 2021

    In most of the articles published, points of view differ. We agree with some and I gree with others I agree with an article in the Guardian by Peter Sutores. He does not believe that technology is the solution to the climate crisis.... In saying these moments need humility, I agree. We need humility in life and not rely on technology primarily, but I disagree with him and I don't agree with him in his saying, "We can't invent ourselves to get out of this mess." With will and mental development, we create miracles. We can develop ourselves more and more and not rely on technology. Basically, despite all its benefits in all areas I want to ask Peter Sutores What can technology do in the future..? Is it possible for the electronic person (robot) to spread among the world and have rights like the rights of any other person...? I think it is not possible and difficult to achieve this thing... Peter cannot change the collective mentality of civilization because not all societies read Peter's opinions and the world is much more preoccupied with many economical perspectives than Peter's articles.

  • British Council.jpg chatty_cicada | Rimal Prep Girls School C | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    06 Oct 2021

    I agree with the writer in all his articles, but I do not agree with him that our civilization is fragile to face the Corona pandemic and that technology is the contributor to avoiding this epidemic. Humans have taken the necessary means for prevention and treatment, and this indicates the progress of human civilization.

    Dear writer, do you think that technology did not contribute to the industrialization of this epidemic?
    On the other hand, human civilization worked to avoid it.

  • British Council.jpg active_emotion | Mymensingh Girls Cadet College | Bangladesh
    07 Oct 2021

    This whole article is a complete paradigm shift in climate change. It bluntly criticizes our blind credence on technology that It is the solution of everything. Our ancestors, who were used to in walking miles after after miles for food and water, sought the feelings of comfort and easiness in every work. The exact instinct of seeking comfort has been passed to us through genes and we conquered it by inventing new technologies, nobody is here to blame. And it is true that we are living in a new geological age , Anthropocene. Technology has opened the gates of catastrophe on the nature yet we believe it can also help in closing the gates. This paradoxical belief is not invalid.
    Peter Sutoris has explained it in precise words, "Rebuilding our relationship with our planet does not mean abandoning the many achievements of our civilisation. Some of our technological innovations can help us treat the symptoms of the environmental multi-crisis. But addressing the causes means abandoning some of the assumptions on which our current society is built: infinite growth, the instrumentalisation of the natural environment and speciesism." I completely agree with this.
    In today's capitalistic world we hyped up the uses of climate destructing tools in our everyday life as it gives uSthe feelings of abundance and growth in a short period of time. We need to get our mind out of the illusion of abundance and luxurious comfort when in real we are running the turbine of ruination.
    Extra challenge: The needs of today are numerous and competition for government resources is fierce all over the world. The change of collective mindset shift , Peter were talking about, is definitely hard. But I believe it is possible if we stop seeing them as a rapid change in our lifestyle. We need to make them parts of our life, daily habits. Implying laws such as restriction on using plastics, giving limitation on throwing food wastes ,cutting the legal supplies for fossil fuels and more like these will help in making the changes we not just want, but badly are in need of.

  • British Council.jpg trustworthy_orangutan | Mymensingh Girls Cadet College | Bangladesh
    07 Oct 2021

    Firstly, I would like to start with what I believe which is climate change should not be addressed as a problem to be solved rather its a situation which should be handled. Not only by technological advancement or being humble and co-operative towards working with each other to reduce it or only by powerful leadership to mitigate its effects, none of these can single handedly be the only option because there is no best or only way to handle this situation. I would like to add that, Climate change is a global change where global collective action is required to fight against it, not a single initiative.
    "This rapid increase in our control over the Earth has brought us to the precipice of catastrophic climate change, triggered a mass extinction, disrupted our planet’s nitrogen cycles and acidified its oceans, among other things."-I would like to partially agree with peter on this because the urge to control earth has contributed greatly to climate change. According to NASA, 2016 and 2020 are tied for the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. It is undeniable that human activities have warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land and that widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere have occurred. But I would also like to clarify that it can be a contributing factor but never be the only cause.

    "To believe that we can innovate and engineer ourselves out of this mess is to miss the key lesson of the Anthropocene – that dealing with planetary-scale processes calls for humility, not arrogance."-I would also like to agree with him on this.
    According to me, if genetic superiority is an immutable evolutionary fact, our abuse and over-consumption of global resources is pure self-indulgence. We chop down trees, build roads through bird sanctuaries, replace mangrove forests with commercial shrimp farms, and construct vast open cast mines with huge tailings ponds that scar the landscape and pollute groundwater.
    Not only is the environment suffering, our own societies are suffering as certain communities, towns, cities, regions — even countries — are left behind in our greedy struggle to accumulate resources and possessions. To add to this situation, “the wealthiest one billion people produce 60% of GHGs [Greenhouse Gases] whereas the poorest three billion produce only 5%.”).Thus we can see the clear difference in rate but can also understand that the pressure and effect of climate change is not different for any and the our greatest threat from a heating planet is the lack of humility, our leaders are misunderstanding man's proper place in our environment and the belief that all-powerful humans can continually manipulate the planet on which we live.

    "The Covid-19 pandemic has shown just how fragile and myopic our civilisation is. While technology has played a huge role in finding a way out of the pandemic through the development of vaccines, it has also highlighted humanity’s limitations as our societies became paralysed in the face of forces of nature more powerful than ourselves."-which I believe is entirely true because technology has played an important role in responding to the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and subsequent COVID-19 pandemic. The virus's blend of lethality and transmissibility have challenged officials and exposed critical limitations of the traditional public health apparatus. But on the other hand, according to an article published in z3 news, COVID-19 solution doesn’t fit the definition of a vaccine, calling it that is misleading and dangerous because it makes it sound like a known thing and a safe thing since vaccines have been around for a long time. But it cannot immune oneself from COVID rather it can slow the spread of the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. Through this we can understand that ,technological advancement has helped us through the pandemic but we also had our limitations.
    "Our civilisation is underpinned by extractivism, a belief that the Earth is ours to exploit, and the nonsensical idea of infinite growth within a finite territory."-I partially agree with him on this because its not entirely true. Since the mid-20th century, extractive frontiers have expanded around the planet as global demand for commodities has increased. Most countries have activated their primary sectors of production to exploit landscapes that were previously inaccessible, such as in the case of fracking and tar sands extraction in the Artic or in the open sea. The central idea behind such state-sanctioned extractivism is that extractive projects are strategic ventures for national development in resource-rich countries that can thereby strengthen their comparative economic advantages .On the contrary, in the last 20 years, several governments in Latin America, Africa, and Asia have challenged the “resource curse” by asserting national control over new forms of primary-production extractive industries. Another example is that in face of violence and repression, El Salvador’s water protectors achieved something monumental: a national ban on metal mining.

    "This is a crisis of culture and politics, not of science and technology."-I cannot stand with peter on this like I said earlier, nothing can be the only contributor to this as its a global change and there can never be an single solution as it requires collective initiative and work to solve this.

    A collective growth mindset can be created by teaching and encouraging certain behaviors that individuals, teams and whole organizations can continually adopt to shift their mindsets over time. Collective mind of our society is manifest primarily through the mass media. In other words, the mass media can be a direct and visible expression of our social brain or collective mental functioning as civilization. The key to changing your mindset also lies in self-awareness . To change a mindset, people have to be able to identify the situations that trigger a fixed mindset and thus a collective mindset can be changed. I would like to conclude with the quote of George Bernard Shaw, "Progress is impossible without change and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything."

    1. tom Tom @ Topical Talk
      trustworthy_orangutan's comment 07 Oct 2021

      A very careful dissection of this topic, trustworthy_orangutan! It's also good to see you use phrases like "partially agree" as this shows you appreciate the grey area between fully-agreeing and fully-disagreeing! Having read the article, is there a question you are still thinking about?

      1. British Council.jpg trustworthy_orangutan | Mymensingh Girls Cadet College | Bangladesh
        Tom @ Topical Talk's comment 09 Oct 2021

        The question I've been thinking about, I would say its more like a concern, is about the technology that could help decrease the effect of climate change without having a massive or dangerous consequence in the future which is contrary to the thinking process of peter. If it becomes possible, how wonderful will it be! I'm hopeful that soon these technologies will take place.

  • British Council.jpg lovely_moth | El Rafie A | Egypt
    07 Oct 2021

    I agree because some of this technological machines are harmful and it can make pollution that can increase from carbon dioxide and that makes a problem of climate change ✓✓

  • British Council.jpg selfassured_mode | Joypurhat Girls' Cadet College | Bangladesh
    09 Oct 2021

    I think the carbon capture plant will make a difference but it would not actually be huge. The carbon capture plant is obviously a good idea, but it is actually not enough compared to the carbon secretion in the whole world; and the amount of carbon secretion will keep increasing in the future years. More-ever, the project is very costly. It would require a lot of money, time and labor to start functioning. So I do not think it is wise to depend on this carbon capturing plant only; rather we should try to decrease the amount of carbon secretion and find a better way to fight against this issue.

  • British Council.jpg practical_seal | El Rafie A | Egypt
    09 Oct 2021

    I agree with him but first we should solve the problem then we try to improve our technological invention and treat the symptoms

  • British Council.jpg focused_otter | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    17 Oct 2021

    A wrong statement that we can innovate when we plan well for the crisis and how to get out of it after taking the necessary precautions. I say a wrong statement when we plan well, we will overcome mistakes and move forward. We will plan well and overcome the expected pitfalls.

  • British Council.jpg focused_otter | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    18 Oct 2021

    Iceland has turned from a poor country to the most productive country and one of the most touristic countries, despite its small size and low natural resources.

    Iceland has experienced a major economic boom during recent centuries, making it one of the most innovative countries.

    1. Tiff-Avatar.jpg Tiff @ Topical Talk
      focused_otter's comment 18 Oct 2021

      Can you explain how your example supports a point of view?

  • British Council.jpg active_fact | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    21 Oct 2021

    question that technology is a solution to all problems?? I think this question is difficult and not that easy!! I think that it is a 100% misconception, and there may be different views on this subject. Some will say that technology has caused a stir and a shift in the invention of serums and treatment methods, but is it possible because of medical or technological success that it completely controls our lives??? From my other point of view, technology is the reason for the manufacture of weapons and the destruction of the world, and here the question takes us: What are the problems that technology can solve??? First, we must be liberated from the control of the technological mentality over us and go to a purely intellectual mentality, so technology cannot solve societal problems such as poverty and income levels!! And the false belief is that technology is the solution, not vinegar, the solution lies in thinking and technology is just a tool or an auxiliary factor,, that societal problems need sociologists or specialists and human minds to think, and we must not ignore the huge volume of experimenters and problem-solving made by scientists. And this must be appreciated in general. We must be freed from the rule that every problem we return to solve through technology. Is this blind drift behind modern technology unreasonable? We must return our minds to their natural work by transforming values ​​by transforming people into their thinking and minds, and the permanent reference for the ancient generations and their beliefs. Let us return to our human nature. Simple and untainted by complexity and liberation from beliefs that have controlled human minds with a divine instinct to think!! Let us strive to solve our problems by ourselves, with our minds, and with our view of things. Perhaps the solution lies in mental simplicity

  • British Council.jpg successful_violin | Joypurhat Girls' Cadet College | Bangladesh
    02 Nov 2021

    Climate is changing due to this and that and so we should stop this, take that step and so on!
    From the article I basically agree with_ it's not a solution of stopping the uses of technology on which our recent civilization standing on. Yes, it's true that there is side effects of these but none can deny the benefits. It's quite clear that the environment is changing with climate change and none but we are the solo solution in this regard and at a point where I would disagree is this is a crisis of culture and politics not science and technology. If we look deeply then it's the technology causing climate change. Yes we invented technology from our needs but is it always the want or need's call for invention? I don't think so as scientist invented many technology out of curiosity and improvement. If we only blame the culture then it's unfair as it's our humility which can be the only solution I strongly think.
    Recently due to COVID-19 pandemic a great change came into our education system. Students are being given assignment and so on. So in our country Bangladesh, my little sister was given as assignment of planting a tree and for that there is 10 marks so millions of students with their parents had to plant tree for that so called marks. And in this case some may take it positively or some may only thinking about getting that marks. Some also think that it's misuses of money and space! So it's our call that how will we react over anything. From the whole situation I got a solution for climate change is we have and have to change our way of thinking and think on an average scale for solving the climate change. It's not too late to change our mind and think about climate change like passing exam or winning a game according to different perspective.
    To the author, actually to all the author my question is- you publish many types of news based on entertainment or sports, business and so on but why there is so less articles and news on raising consciousness for climate change? Why each and every day the time line is not showing the seriousness of climate? Is the earth about only business and making profit? It's not a joke or discussion matter anymore rather we have to be very serious about it but no none is aware of it. Recently United Nations conference showed an animated short film where a dinosaur talked about the effects of climate change all over the world and requested the human beings to be serious and if they don't want their extinction the save the planet.
    We take all our necessary things from the earth and in return what are we giving? Only pollution and ruins? Is it our humanity? Of course not so we have to change our way of thinking and nothing cause it's the only solution. What other commenters think about my idea please share?
    Thank you.

  • British Council.jpg digital_currant | Shouka Prep Girls School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    11 Nov 2021

    I say that our society has become dependent on technology in many things when they communicate via the Internet and its tools and means are phones, machines, computers and others.
    Some society used technology in different forms, including positive and negative forms. Today, I will write on this topic about negative forms.
    One of the negative forms that makes them isolated from society and which affects autism and isolation from society and which affects human health and technology leads to pollution in the environment and this may pose a great danger to the health of our society and through that we waste our time on things that are useless and I advise Our current society is not to rely on technology because technology has negative causes that lead to a great danger to the health of our society.

  • British Council.jpg pioneering_wilddog | Jabalia Prep Girls A School | Occupied Palestinian Territory
    04 Dec 2021

    Well, in fact I agree with Mr. Peter in saying that getting rid of this problem requires humility, not arrogance, we are in this together, and we cannot do that in such a case, and also, agree with him in his saying, that people are becoming dependent Technology greatly, it is true that the world has become developed, but sometimes we have to know the problem in the first place to reach the solution, and the problem here is us, and we overuse things that are harmful to the environment, we believe that technology will solve any problem we can reach.
    As for me, I do not agree with him in his saying that man cannot make himself by himself, and that is wrong, because man is the one who determines this and it appears through his actions.
    And there is one question I want to ask him, which is that we all know the cause of the problem, and we know that the solution is in our hands, so why should we be lazy about doing it, and the practical steps to get rid of our problem??.
    I am really sure this article can make a difference, but is anyone listening??.

You must be logged in with Student Hub access to post a comment. Sign up now!