40 shades of grey pdf

Microsoft Office YTD Video Downloader. Adobe Photoshop CC. VirtualDJ Avast Free Security. WhatsApp Messenger. Talking Tom Cat. Clash of Clans. Subway Surfers. Sign In. Copy from this list Export Report this list. Refine See titles to watch instantly, titles you haven't rated, etc. Prime Video Rent or Buy 3.

Drama 3 Romance 3 Thriller 2. Feature Film 3. Historically in times of fewer resources per capita, earlier human societies and tribes before them went to war. But this continuum is so often avoided in discussions that it needs to be mentioned. We will go to war again if we don't manage to cooperate to solve the future constraints in a constructive way, and there are ways.

This time, war would be much more devastating than ever before in human history. In a peaceful world where might it better be directed? We are 7. UN and other international institutions misunderstand the energy primacy underlying human economies. Does a carbon pulse informed synthesis imply substantially lower populations this century? Unless some of the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse show up, by far the more likely scenario is a maintained high population level, with less resources per capita maybe considerably less.

Malthus was "right" but missed the 'vertical revolution' of fossil carbon. Ehrlich was "right" but missed globalization and the birth of credit markets, pulling resources forward in time.

Perhaps someone today hearing this story immediately expecting large population die-offs based on resource constraints will also be "right" but miss the more obvious trajectory of consumption decline rather than population decline.

In the developed world, where people consume x their food consumption for other things, there is a lot of room to go down without affecting wellbeing. So less consumption is still viable, and even desirable.

Human history is replete with quite intelligent and otherwise successful cultures that simply got something about the big picture crucially wrong. Easter Islanders believed that resources flowed from the good will of their ancestors, so it was only logical to cut down all the trees to aid in the construction of ever-bigger stone heads.

Their behavior was clever but not wise. Our culture similarly rewards reductionist viewpoints and expertise in solving problems.

But as we increasingly reward vertical expertise within a discipline, we lose the wisdom that comes from crossing disciplines. Simply put, intelligence and wisdom work best in synergy. Modern humans, with ample intelligence but a dearth of wisdom risk becoming idiot-savants, metaphorically pushing levers in increasingly clever ways, for building modern versions of the stone heads on Rapa Nui.

Our education system is becoming less relevant for the future we are facing. Primary and secondary education are a product of energy surplus. Education from a lens of intelligent foresight would focus on science synthesis, understanding our own minds, on ecological principles, dealing with uncertainty, and on the problem-solving skills that will be increasingly needed in a lower-energy-throughput society.

Less specialization and more systemic understanding would be the order of the present day. We certainly need currency for transacting and storing wealth, but our culture has taken it to an extreme, gradually but almost completely financializing the human experience.

One can hope that a vast pool of expressions of humanity lies dormant beneath the stacks of electronic digits. Humans are not evil, not any more than wolves or wildebeest. It is important to not conflate our collective impact with who we are as individual life forms. But most of these recipes —w ith albeit laudable goals — are either incompatible with our physical reality or with behavioral patterns evolved over hundreds of thousands of years.

It is unlikely we will en masse prepare for the Great Simplification ahead —t he cultural, behavioral and systemic barriers are too large. Instead of advocating for unrealistic outcomes, we can put effort towards changing the initial conditions that will result in better outcomes and then make new moves —currently not on the gameboard, possible.

Similarly, a full accounting of the severity of our predicament — on radio, television and in papers, will never be popular.

But acknowledging that would be Other than perhaps climate change, both Democrats and Republicans are both sharply divorced from the realities of our coming challenges. Resource depletion, credit overshoot and the accompanying systemic risks are absent from any political conversations. Instead, substantial energy and vitriol are expended on the things an increasing polarized society disagrees on.

As such, the current arguments between Republicans and Democrats are akin to arguing about which mosquito repellent is best to put on our arms, while a crocodile has our leg in its mouth. We live in a male dominated culture.

As a result, among other things, testosterone and dopamine probably influence decisions more than oxytocin and serotonin. Women — for obvious biological reasons — tend to have shallower discount rates than men things in the future carry more weight.

If you could create a list of the ten best ways to improve the environment, e. Similarly, a list of 10 best ways to grow the economy e. There have been many social contracts in recorded human history.

Constitution, humans have often created rules and guidelines to properly delineate the needs and circumstances of the time. We now live on an ecologically full planet and are aware of what we are, where we came from, what we need, what we want and what we are doing — to each other and to our surroundings.

This continuum will remain a back-burner item. Until it moves to the front burner. Humans join forces to cooperate on simple and clear pursuits like profits or military defense. As groups become larger they become less and less able to grasp and convey complex situations, let alone creatively respond to them. At the scale of hundreds or thousands in a group or organization, the resulting behavior defaults to popular and simple responses. Think of any large environmental or social NGO.

This has large implications for the current plethora of risks we face. Forming movements with a lot of people caring about the same thing is a good idea.

The future exists as a probability distribution of very bad, bad, so-so, benign and very good futures. But people dislike uncertainty. The reality is that the future is not yet determined and exists as a constantly shifting probability distribution based on events, technology, wisdom, risk and the actions of individuals and communities. We need more people to avoid the two poles of denial and nihilism and stay in the center, own a bit of dissonance, and engage. We are now likely headed for a world with less physical throughput whether we choose it or not.

Americans use 38 times the energy as people in the Philippines but are equally happy on well-being metrics. Less and more need to be unpacked beyond their monetary labels and the gut reaction to hearing them. As individuals we can strive to be happier with absolute wealth and focus less on relative. Names and details have been changed. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Skip to main content. Log in via OpenAthens. Log in using your username and password For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts. Forgot your log in details? Register a new account? Forgot your user name or password?

Search for this keyword. Advanced search.