JANA BARSCH

Philosophical basis for "Fridays for Future“

cause for thought for our society

*

A question regularly goes through my mind: "Do I really want to bring children into this world? Western society has been selfish with nature for centuries. Especially since the beginning of industrialization, the environment has been damaged more than ever before. Humanity steals nature’s treasures in order to make economic profit. Global CO2 emissions were higher than ever before in 2019, at just under 37 billion tonnes (cf. Time (2019): Global CO2 emissions are rising more slowly. Online: https://www.zeit.de/wissen/umwelt/2019-12/studie-wachstum-co2-emission-weltweit-2019 (08.03.2020)). Our earth is warming up due to these immense emissions. In 1880 the annual measurement of the global mean surface temperature began. Since then, our earth has already warmed by a little more than one degree Celsius (cf. NASA (2020): NASA, NOAA Analyses Reveal 2019 Second Warmest Year on Record. Online: https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20200115/ (08.03.2020)). This increase does not seem worth mentioning at first reading, but it has drastic consequences. The weather is becoming more extreme. The polar caps are melting and are causing sea levels to rise continuously. Coastal regions and low-lying countries will already be under water in the near future. There will be longer, more frequent and more intense periods of drought. These favour fires and also cause the harvest to dry up. This leads to economic losses and food shortages. At the same time, precipitation can become heavier. In cities and on dry land, it is difficult for it to run off. Low groundwater levels are becoming more frequent, which is a particular problem in hot and arid countries. The hotter temperatures have a particular impact on the health of the elderly and sick. The animal world and ecosystems are also suffering from the consequences (cf. Zeit (2019): Already 1.5 degrees more in Germany. Online: https://www.zeit.de/wissen/umwelt/2019-11/erderwaermung-temperaturanstieg-deutschland-klimawandel-folgen (09.03.2020)). These were just a few examples of effects. There are countless others. I don’t want to imagine what else will happen if we do not stop global warming. So I looked for a sustainable approach to stop this process and came across the philosophical form of monism. It sees man and nature as a physical and mental entity and says that when we intervene in nature, we are also intervening in the lives of people (cf. de Angelis, Marco (2016): Philosophy for All (1.0) : Manifesto for the Philosophical Identity of the European People, Möhnsee: Phileuropa: 21). The counterpart to this is dualism, in which humans regards nature as an object outside themselves (cf. de Angelis (2016): 24).

The majority of people live according to the dualistic system. I would like to pursue the following question in my term paper: "Our dualistic society contributes a lot to climate change. Could living in monos be a solution? If so, how?". In the first part of this paper I will explain important terms. Then I will define the task of philosophy before I turn to the dualistic and monistic society. I would also like to make a reference to "Fridays for Future" and finally answer the central question in my conclusion. In my elaboration I will mainly refer to the literature of Marco de Angelis, because I can identify well with his views.

1. Philosophical explanations of terms

For understanding this paper I will define some terms in this chapter. Every philosopher has her or his own views on meanings, so I want to counteract possible ambiguities.  

2.1. Philosophy

The term philosophy is derived from the ancient Greek "philosophía" and means "love of wisdom". Philosophy is a general science with a wide range of subjects (see Wikipedia (2020): Philosophy. Online: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophie (11.03.2020)). At Wikipedia I found the following definition: "Philosophy [...] attempts to fathom, interpret and understand the world and human existence" (ibid.). I question this statement critically, because in my opinion philosophy comprises even more, such as animal ethics and environmental ethics. These play a weighting role under the aspect of dualism and monism. Philosophy can be divided into theory and practice. Theory comprises knowledge and understanding of the world, while practice embeds human action and individual understanding of the meaning of life. The aim of philosophy is to live according to a style based on reason (cf. de Angelis (2016): 9).

2.2 Reason

Reason is an important aspect of philosophical science. In philosophy, only principles and truths are accepted that can be logically proven with reason (cf. de Angelis (2016): 11). We human beings can reach knowledge of the objective world through reason, since we possess a mental, conscious form of reason. Nature, however, is rational in its material, unconscious form. It means, then, that humans, having attained knowledge, can apply it practically through nature (cf. de Angelis (2016): 21). An example: People came to the realization that the wind can be used as driving energy. On the practical level, people built sailing ships and windmills to take advantage of this. In this process the principle of homogeneity of both actors is at stake.

2.3 Monism

The word monism is derived from the Greek "monos", which means "alone". Philosophy understands monism as a theory in which all processes in the world can be traced back to a single basic principle (cf. Wikipedia (2019): monism. Online: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monismus (11.3.2020)). It thus presupposes homogeneity between humans, the subject and nature, the object. Nature is regarded as the origin of us all. Simple predetermined forms of life, such as molecules and minerals, arise from it. They are considered necessary forms of existence. In it, the unconscious reason of the laws of nature is present. But nature is also the origin of more complex selfdetermined forms of life, such as animals and humans. Especially the human being is considered a free form of existence, which possesses the conscious reason of ethics. Object and subject together are regarded as monos. This is called the rationality of the universe (cf. de Angelis (2016): 23). Monism assumes that object and subject are connected by their physical constitution and by their rational spiritual nature. This monos has different degrees of developmental stages (cf. de Angelis (2016): 25).

2.4 Dualism

The term dualism is derived from the Latin "dualis", which means "containing two". The dualistic doctrine represents the opposite of the monistic doctrine. It assumes that there are two different and independent basic elements (cf. Wikipedia (2019): dualism. Online: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualismus (12.03.2020)). In this case the doctrine includes the distinction between the human being and nature, i.e. subject and object. Humans see nature as an "external" world. There are different opinions about the exact relationship between subject and object. A few people feel powerless against nature. Most people, however, feel superior to nature. Although they have their origins in nature, they call themselves the subject and thus distinguish themselves linguistically from the object, nature.

2. Mission of the philosophy

In philosophy, it is fundamental that philosophers make their long-term, developing thoughts and experiences public and thus provide an insight into their inner, spiritual understanding. It is important that these appeal to the broad masses and are both complex and written in simple language. Indeed, the goal of philosophy is that as many people as possible live a lifestyle based on reason (cf. de Angelis (2016): 10). In doing so, it should unite people worldwide. Marco de Angelis writes about this:

"The task of philosophy, in fact, is to provide, on the basis of knowledge of the world, first of all to itself, but then also to others, with indications that are useful for leading a wise and balanced life" (de Angelis (2016): 9).

For people to help each other understand the world, it is important to remember that all people are equal. They are all considered as subjects. Even though each person is and thinks individually, they all possess the potential of absolute reason within themselves, which is to be brought to light by means of philosophy. On the one hand, it should convey this morality, but also help to put it into practice. Philosophy deals with the meaning of life. With the help of ethics people should come to the realization of meaning (cf. de Angelis (2016): 49). Ethics is a philosophical discipline. It contains the prerequisites of human action on the basis of morals and moral norms (cf. Duden (n.y.): Ethics. Online: https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Ethik (13.03.2020)). Ethics allows people to recognize the absolute in other people. They see each other as rational, free and creative (cf. de Angelis (2016): 49). In summary, the task of philosophy is to share knowledge with the world population so that they can live wisely and rationally. It should also support people in these transformation processes.

3. Dualistic society

In this chapter I would like to deal with the effects that a society that lives according to dualistic principles has to answer for. This is mainly characterized by the opposing forms of existence of subject and object. Here, we are talking about human being and nature. The human feels superior to nature and exploits it for his own purposes.

On the one hand, people intervene in nature by trying to change it in a way that is favourable to them. This happens for example through genetically manipulated maize cultivation. The plant’s genes are modified so that they can resist natural pests (cf. Pflanzen, Forschung, Ethik (2017): Gentechnisch veränderter Bt-Mais - In der EU vor weiteren Zulassungen, in Deutschland verboten. Online: https://www.pflanzen-forschung-ethik.de/konkret/mais.html (14.03.2020)). This process brings further benefits for humans, but who allows them to simply intervene in nature for their own benefit? Humans also intervenes in other areas of nature. They exploits the earth in order to obtain mineral resources. Many of these treasures are further processed and serve a purpose. However, some of these treasures, such as precious stones, are alienated in order to sell them and generate profit. This greed for wealth turns even the superior subjects against each other. As a result, some subjects degrade other subjects to objects. This was particularly noticeable during the colonial period. Dominant colonies conquered certain places militarily. They operated for economic reasons (cf. Jansen, Jan C. (2012): Colonialism, Munich: C.H.Beck: 17). Often militarily weak countries were conquered and land was taken. The reasons for this were local high quality resources or optimal location factors for the cultivation of certain plants and food. The inhabitants lost control over their own way of life because they were under external leadership. They were forced to help with cultivation and dismantling and were partially enslaved (cf. Jansen (2012): 82 f.). All out of greed to maximise profits and rule over the land and people. Today many of the countries that were dominated by colonialism at that time are dependent on economic support from outside. Due to the dualistic lifestyle, only few structures can be found in these countries even today and they have only a scarce supply of resources because they cannot regenerate fast enough. Even today more modern structures of a dualistic society can be found in the world. A lot of companies are settling in resource-rich countries and exploiting them. The companies temporarily stimulate the local economy and create jobs for the often less privileged inhabitants. However, the companies leave the often third-world countries after the resources are exhausted. What remains is an exhausted piece of land, workers who are now without employment and a local economy that has to face these losses. There is no compensation for the state, for the inhabitants. Businesses do this because they want to continue to outperform sustained economic growth. But there can be no sustained growth under conditions of finite resources. And so it is that "Earth Overshoot Day" is moving ever further forward. „Earth Overshoot Day“ is about the resource budget: "In 2019, humanity has used up the resources that nature can restore in one year in seven months.", according to the Federal Environment Agency (Federal Environment Agency (2019): Earth Overshoot Day 2019: Resource budget used up. Online: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/earth-overshoot-day-2019-ressourcenbudget (13.03.2020)). Last year this fell on 29 July 2019. The world population currently lives as if it had 1.75 earths at its disposal. If we continue to live like this, the ecosystems can no longer generate themselves and we are driving climate change.

It can be said that in a dualistic society people behave selfishly towards nature. They intervene in nature, change it and exploit it. Since industrialisation, such interventions have been taking place more frequently. Raw materials are taken from the earth and processed into end products in factories that damage the climate. This processing generates a lot of CO2 emissions. Industrialisation has ensured that a larger, more efficient and more extensive range of products is available on the market. As a result, economically strong countries like Germany became a consumer society. 

For example, the number of cars registered annually is also increasing here (cf. Ahlswede, Andreas (2020): Passenger car stock in Germany until 2020.  Online: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/12131/umfrage/pkw-bestand-in-deutschland/ (14.03.2020)). These are driving climate change even further forward.

I can state that life in a dualistic society is responsible for many effects. Above all, it plays a decisive role in driving climate change. In order to counteract this, we must all stick together and take care of our ecosystem. Every single inhabitant of this world is required to reduce this high consumption of resources and the associated climate change.

4. Society in monism

After writing about the negative effects of dualism, I would now like to turn to the oppositional doctrine of monism. It provides that humans and nature do not oppose each other, but see themselves as one. After all, humans come from nature. So they are physically and mentally a unity. When we people intervene in nature, we thus also intervene in our lives at the same time. As already mentioned, not only we humans possess the potential of absolute reason, nature does the same and follows logic. Because of this connection it would only be reasonable and logical to preserve nature (cf. de Angelis (2016): 21 f. ). After all, we owe it our life. In monism, it is also rational to consider other people as equal and not to oppress them, as was the case during colonialism.

I would now like to describe a scenario of how monism could affect the world. Let’s assume that humans no longer feel superior to animals. It would only be lived vegan, because nobody gives us the right to claim their flesh and crops. Thus they would not have to be held and bred in masses any longer. 

The animals kept are fattened particularly heavily on maize and soya, which has to be cultivated: "Around 30 percent of the global area under cultivation (500 million hectares) is currently required only for feed production - and the trend is rising. ", explains the WWF (WWF magazine (above): THE BIG EATING. Online: http://mobil.wwf.de/fileadmin/fm-wwf/PublikationenPDF/WWF-Magazin-0215-Leseprobe-Das-grosse-Fressen.pdf (14.03.2020)). Here the tendency of the dualistic society is described, in which we are at present. The tendency for a monistic society, on the other hand, would decrease. In a monistic society we would no longer have to meet the described consumption to this extent. For example, especially in the tropical countries no more forests would be cut down so that there would be enough fertile arable land for the cultivation of fodder. The current situation is as follows:

"According to estimates by the European Commission, more than 30 percent of imported plant and animal food comes from tropical countries, which are destroying their forests in return" (ibid.).

In monism, forests would no longer be cut down to this extent, with the result that there would no longer be any extinction of species and threatened species would be able to recover. A further aspect of the cultivation of feed for fattening concerns the use of the scarce fresh water: "Agriculture also consumes 70 percent of the fresh water used worldwide, in developing countries even up to 90 percent" (ibid.). With the regression of agricultural cultivation in monism, it would be possible to provide people in developing countries with connections to fresh water, which would no longer be used to this extent for agriculture. These connections would be in favour of the human right to water. The world population continues to grow. Living in monism can help to ensure that we do not continue to live beyond our ecological means. For this series of positive effects on nature and the climate, all that is needed is a vegan lifestyle for the world population. However, the chance that any of the 7.7 billion people in the world would voluntarily choose this lifestyle is zero. One would have to find a regulation on political level. That is a rather utopian scenario. That is why I will present some more ways in which each individual can live according to monistic principles and thus make a small contribution to combating climate change. Consumers can generate electricity from renewable energies. Coal combustion, which accounts for a considerable proportion of CO2 emissions in Germany, would decline as demand decreases. We can consciously reduce our plastics consumption. This not only requires oil and climate-unfriendly production, but is increasingly being stored in landfills or even in water after use. It is also advisable to travel by public transport or other environmentally friendly alternatives. When shopping, you can also make sure that the products have had a short transport route and that they have been produced under fair and sustainable conditions.

There are many more possibilities to live according to the monistic principle and thus protect the environment and climate. In order to transform our current dualistically shaped society into a monistic one, it requires a lot of reason, discipline and above all cohesion. The global social movement "Fridays for Future" also calls for this.

5. "Fridays for Future"

On March 15, 2019, schoolchildren and students in particular took part in the first worldwide demonstration of "Fridays for Future" (FFF). It is a strike, because they are skipping their lessons on Fridays to protest together for stricter and faster climate protection measures (cf. Wikipedia (2020): Fridays for Future. Online: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fridays_for_Future (15.03.2020)). Especially through initiator Greta Thunberg, this movement received immense media attention. FFF makes concrete demands on politicians to ensure that the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement of 2015 can be met. The goal is to limit global warming to less than 1.5 degrees Celsius. Among other things, it demands for Germany to phase out coal by 2030 and for energy supply to be based solely on renewable energy sources by 2035 (cf. Fridays for Future (w. Y.): OUR CALLS TO POLICY. Online: https://fridaysforfuture.de/forderungen/ (15.03.2020)). FFF acts as a role model and inspires hope in people. Many people in the public eye support this strike and call on people to take part in the strike and to question and, if necessary, adapt their current lifestyle; with great success. "Fridays for Future" is a positive example for the introduction into a monistic society. The movement started on August 20, 2018 with a single person and quickly gained worldwide acceptance. We can only hope that this movement will continue to achieve great success in the future.

6. Conclusion

In my conclusion, I would like to return to my guiding question: "Our dualistic society contributes a lot to climate change. Could living in monos be a solution? If so, how?". After extensive research, I can answer the key question with a clear "Yes!“. Yes, living according to monistic principles can certainly be a solution to combat global warming. The majority of the world population lives in a dualistic society that acts irrationally. Such a separation between subject and object is a mistake. People interfered with nature and realised far too late that they too must suffer the consequences. I already listed some consequences in the introduction. This proves that there can be no separation between nature and the human being. We urgently need to change our ways of life, towards a more considerate treatment of our environment. Philosophy has the task of educating the population about reason and must make it clear that subject and object must be seen as a unity. It must also act as an example and show how we can put these monistic principles into practice. In the scenario that I described, all that is needed is a change to a vegan, egalitarian lifestyle in order to create a sequence of positive effects that can save our world climate and save the earth. In monism, what counts most is cohesion, but this does not mean that not everyone can live individually according to monistic principles. If, for example, many individuals decide to buy meat from the region rather than from South America, the market will react and adapt its supply. But this does not happen through mere demonstrations, but through actions. The "Fridays for Future" movement is calling for these actions with considerable success so far. It is also calling for changes at the macro level, and as quickly as possible. 

With monism we still have a chance to save our planet, but to do so we must act now!