Discuss amongst yourselves:

3 responses to “Discuss amongst yourselves:”

1. My first thought in response is that so-called tolerance is not enough. In fact, “tolerance” (e.g., “tolerating” “difference”) is pretty darn weak. How about: We have so, so much to learn from each other?

   And that is just the sociological viewpoint on the question. Diversity, of course, really means so much more.

2. There are a lot of conditions that can be sustained. Most of them are just darned unpleasant.

   I think to have a meaningful discussion about this, we’d have to define what we mean by ‘sustainable’ and by ‘diversity’.

   • Excellent point. My original thought was about the inherent instability of a system which is a monoculture and can only be maintained by constant addition of external inputs. Risky, that, when the flow of inputs can only be sustained through the use of non-renewable energy and/or force.

     However, I think it extends to cultural conditions, because there seems to be diversity in human thought even in the face of enormous pressure to conform to a certain story. People insist on telling other stories, investigating other possibilities. I think there is something here about the range of ideas and the need for competing narratives to maintain the vibrancy and adaptability of human societies. There is a post a-brewing, if I can get myself out of the swamp of post-election despair.

     Coming up for air, soon, I hope.