Climate change is our fault, there is no doubt about that. But we
cannot be blamed entirely for doing so little about it. In the book Don't Even Think About It: Why Our Brains are Wired to Ignore Climate Change, Author George Marshall analyzes why people fail to talk about or even recognize climate change as a problem.
In previous blog posts, I've mentioned that I was one of the many people who were/are ignorant to the true problems that climate presents us with. As I became more educated as to the true nature of climate change, I became increasingly annoyed and angry. Why did it seem like nobody cared? Why did it seem like nothing was getting done? Why are people ignoring evidence?
Marshall looks to answer why people seem to be so unwilling to accept climate change based on both internal and external forces. He also focuses on the different categories of people as those who accept climate change, those who actively deny it, those who are skeptical, and those who are unconvinced of climate change and what aspects allow them to accept climate change or not. For the purpose of this blog post I am going to focus on the psychological aspects of us as humans that make it difficult for us to accept and deal with climate change.
 |
| This graph from the Washington Post shows the fluctuations of those who believe in climate change and those who do not. |
According to Marshall, the beginning of problems in dealing with and believing in climate change lies in our experiences as individuals and the tendencies we have as humans beings. As odd as it seems with relation to all of the negativity that is focused on today, humans tend to be positive creatures. Once something bad happens, we believe that it wont happen to us again. Marshall uses victims of natural disasters to solidify this model, citing their increased invulnerability. Climate change is not a positive problem and thus we have the tendency to tune out when it is mentioned. We also tend to believe that climate change is not our problem, that it is one that is not our problem to deal with. Marshall connects this to social cues like the bystander effect, pluralistic ignorance, and conditional cooperation, where we don't talk about climate change because no one else is and we don't do anything about climate change because we believe others are.
 |
| According to George Marshall, victims of natural disasters have the tendency to ignore climate change as a possible factor that may have caused the natural disaster that they experienced. |
In relation to accepting and dealing with climate change, Marshall cites the tendency to ignore it is because it is not salient. There is still uncertainty about it, it is not a concrete problem. While it is an immediate problem, it does not feel immediate. As humans, we recognize threats based on the immediacy of the problem and because climate change seems like such a far off threat not based in the "here and now", rather in the "then and there", it is ranked very low in our categories of fear that allow us to process and deal with problems. According to Marshall, it ranks somewhere near extraterrestrial threats like asteroid strikes.
While climate change is our fault, the fact that we aren't talking about it or doing much about it isn't entirely our fault. Marshall cites many psychological regions as to why many people are unable to accept the climate change and the threats that accompany it, and therefore do little about it. I believe that a lot of the problem also lies in the purposeful choice to ignore climate change accompanied by the ignorance surrounding it. I hope that Marshall provides ways to deal with these psychological hurdles and ignorance in relation to climate change, as in order for people to mobilize and take action against climate change, they need to realize the true problem of it.
The graph you include in your post is telling. Right now is a most interesting time. We are in a presidential election with huge debates going on between the candidates and in the media about what are the issues facing us. Climate change is in the conversation but, my gosh, it seems to me that the conversation is all too quiet. The Republication candidates seem to all be deniers (can that possibly be true?) and the media is not putting much effort into addressing it - maybe they aren't worried about young voters? Strangely, the oldest candidate, Bernie Sanders, is the one most addressing it!
ReplyDeleteMy book seems to be very similar, it also looks at the psychological aspects that block humans recognition of climate change as a current issue. And it is weird to think that all these activities are happening subconsciously. I am curious to learn more about how Marshall thinks we can combat these activities.
ReplyDeleteIn my book (Learning to Die in the Anthropocene by Roy Scranton) he mentions that it is easier for humans to distract themselves with things like social media or TV than it is to actually address the important issues like climate change. Collectively we don't even want to think about it. It is so sad to think that we are so apathetic towards something so serious.
ReplyDeleteThe graph you included covers a topic that has been bothering me ever since I started taking this class. I've been watching the debates, and they barely ever talk about the issue of climate. A little more on the democratic side for obvious reasons, but even they cover other issues more thoroughly that in my opinion are not anywhere near as important as the crisis of climate change.
ReplyDeleteThis is very fascinating. People are fascinating creatures. Being able to tie together climate change and social perceptions is thought provoking. It makes you think what necessary steps we need to take to get people more motivated to do something about climate change. I think this problem also stems from the uncertainty that comes along with climate change models: models include so much variation from so many different groups that it can be hard to decide what to believe is what is actually happening to our planet.
ReplyDelete