Building Trust | Nate Kinch

[@NateKinch91]

Such an honour to be on the show. Thank you Rachel.

[@georgewaters6424]

you were great!

[@martys9041]

G'day Nate, great talk. With respect from the land of the Gummingurru people.

[@NateKinch91]

@@georgewaters6424 really appreciate you saying so. Such challenging rocks to discuss in only an hour. Rachel is a brilliant host. Huge amount of respect for the process that she is leading here.

[@NateKinch91]

@@martys9041 lovely to hear from you. Thank you so much. Here’s to hoping many of us spend more time deeply pondering, learning about, and directly engaged in care for Country.

[@PlanetCritical]

Thank you so much for coming on!

[@j.s.c.4355]

27 minutes in, you hit the nail on the head! No faith that it’ll be ok, but faith that we will be ok in the aftermath. Perfect!

[@yzeeGma]

Thanks, Nate - “the market doesn’t wanna pay you for that”- hit home real hard lol thnx again for the continued brilliance & persistence, Rachel.

[@andrewwoods8153]

Love the discussion Rachel and Nate. Great to hear another Aussie sharing their experiences, ideas and practicalities. The expansive contributions world wide is encouraging. 😊😊

[@logantauson789]

Rachel, you are truly a heroin of our times. Your guests revolutionize my view of the world and actions I take in it every day, however it is your open heart and rebel spirit that draws all of these people both speakers and listeners together over continents and time. Instead of cursing the darkness be the flame. Bravo

[@Mtnshell56]

Amazing! Thank you both!

[@KimberleyHare-r8r]

Brilliant episode - thank you so much Nate and Rachel. xx

[@stefanbernardknauf467]

Thanks for thé podcast, very interesting! A slightly différent perspective I'd like to bring up on Beacons statement in minute 5: O see it from the continental (catholic) perspective of the then valid thesis of humans being an entire part of this miserable earthly life, AND THEREFOR IT IS JUST FOR THE POOR TO SUFFER. This was a strong argument to maintain the power of kings, nobles and church over the rest of the population. So you have to see this reformist self-management as Beacon defines it also as a liberalisation from the established power. It was also a strong political statement. From our wealthy perspective that seems a bit ridiculous, but in the low energy world of those times using more natural resources from almost limitless supplies allowed freeing the people. This was at its base empowerment of the poor, a rather worthy social aim. It got out of hand with time. If you like it became the victim of its own succes. But it also shows a big danger of today's environmentalism: the risk of eco-dictatorship. It is something the German citizens react to lately, for instance with the heat pump legislation. In short getting away from excessive use of natural resources has an impact on our average welfare, there lays a big problem with serious efforts in the direction of climate preservation.

[@j.s.c.4355]

Why is the world in crisis? I’ve heard you ask so many guests this question, and I always imagine myself answering it, so here I go: Evolution of Life. For one billion years, Life has existed on this planet and its fundamental drive has been to survive and replicate. We are products of that drive, which is overwhelmingly powerful. In that context, most people feel they have no choice but to turn the light on in the morning, get dressed and drive to work. There simply is no other feasible way to be. Only those with the freedom to really take on the entire planet as family can take any other action. -And even those who can think about it and talk about it that way still can’t fundamentally change their way of life!

[@_in_the_third_grade2101]

Rachel, you should check out "Ecology and Religion" by John Grim and Mary Tucker! Regardless, worth distinguishing esoteric from exoteric religious practices. Esoteric practices (like Qabalah) in general are more critical, less dogmatic, as well as less literal than the exoteric practices intended "for the masses." In modern US protestantism (and I'm sure in other communities as well) we've let the exoteric dominate and crowd out the esoteric, to the point where Christian esoterica has basically been forgotten outside the divinity schools. But that isn't the only thing that religion can be!

[@theowright765]

Most of Australia's bush has been cut burnt droughted flooded . Last of it in Tasmania and their sustainable timbers are cutting it down and burning it now

[@StashmoCharlie]

While there were some good points in here, I feel this was a lot of wank merchandising. Broad strokes statements about organisational trust and ethics mean virtually nothing. It sounded more like a msnagement consultant pitching for a gig than any kind of meaningful insights into the world and the way it is. A real feature of Australian soft academic life right now. Not the best episode.

[@jr1734]

Agree.

[@seandepagnier]

I must point out, that so far, these videos did nothing but create more co2. This "talk" as a "solution" is literally the same system we are stuck in. Convince me otherwise.

[@NateKinch91]

@@seandepagnier this is an important point to make. Everything has a ‘cost’ relative to planetary boundaries (all organismic and non-organismic processes). With that said, some costs on planetary boundaries can arguably be justified based on a number of factors. If such discussions encourage folks to open up to a completely different worldview (and thus possibility space), then theoretically such a channel could end up having a net positive (due to the action and inaction of those inspired / informed by it). I’m not saying it has or will, but this could certainly happen. Huge amount of nuance of course, but this is the exact type of thing I do in an approach called consequence scanning (an approach to analysis that takes a wide boundary view to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd order effects of decisions and actions, and seeks to maximise the good and minimise the bad based on some well thought out, diverse and holistic value system). Happy to share more on this if useful.

[@alistairmckee9561]

Yes, a good provocation and response. I suppose the ethicist, particularly wrestling with levels of theory and orders of practice in the eco-socio-technical field, has unique moral hazard in just daily life in the overdeveloped world, depending on one's circumstances. It is surely part of the brave new world of eco-anxiety too. Deadlines are a classic source of anxiety, and by Heaven and Hades, do we have a deadline. Science, technology, policy and business (including financial) institutions without even attempting to embody transparent ethical auditing processes today are at best losers. At worst perpetrators of culpable ecocide. Every hospital has an Ethics committee? "Fully costed" complex policies should embody ethical auditing. Yes, the socio-technical domain reaches deep into the shape-shifting power of the architecture of our political ecology, but in this age of hyper-spin the direct shaping of world views is probably the decisive arena in which power to shape year architecture is weilded. It remains true that new age magical thinking and overrought identity politics ar a time like this csn be a self-indulgent distraction and even denial of the "Don't Look Up" variety. However, I'm terrified that without a rapid acceleration of a fully-transformed world view by sufficient numbers, especially in the high-energy quasi-democratic world, in the very short run, overshoot will fatally impact our already limited capacity to vote for a "liveable world" summit - for the children of our world. See recent TGS conversation Nate Hagens with Johan Rockström "Exceeding Planetary Boundaries".

[@Amorfati2000]

What is the biodegrade idea they talk about in organizations?

[@Slick-666]

I think creating a religion based on stewardship of the planet is a noble idea, but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Two thousand some odd years ago, some guy said love thy neighbour, and now we have camps to "reeducate" gay teens. Religions can be co-opted and twisted and parts can be cherry picked to funnel power towards the top. Interesting interview, as always.

[@NateKinch91]

@@Slick-666 absolutely. Organised religion is largely dogma + system of oppression (in grossly oversimplified terms). The point I hoped to make, which is a challenging one to express, is that some folks are suggesting we need to connect on the same level. It’d be something like transitioning towards a belief system that sees the entire earth as a living process (Gaia), and deeply believes in the sacredness of that process (by sacredness I mean something like the fundamental, innate value / importance, just because). As always, it’s a challenge to traverse such ground thoughtfully, caring and coherently.

[@davebourgeois5022]

Agreed, but I liked how Nate clarified and dug deeper into the idea after hearing Rachel respond similarly - what those who are looking to a new religion really want is a revolutionary force that is capable of helping massive numbers of people transcend their individual or in-group self and become part of a wider movement towards good. Religions are one of the only historical precedents for this sort of massive, quick, self-propagating social change - but we definitely need to keep the caveats you point out in mind. I seem to recall Rachel noting in a past interview that maybe it's not the ideas of a religion itself that lead to these issues, but rather that they get written down so they don't change over time and the original meaning based in the original context is lost... finding some way to keep the movement alive and constantly updating itself would certainly help.

[@Slick-666]

@@NateKinch91 I always find myself pausing and commenting before I finish the video, it's a bad habit of mine, I'm afraid. Thank you for the reply, Nate! Great discussion! I wonder if the English language is even equipped for such a drastic paradigm shift. Maybe we need a new eco-language to accompany this transition?

[@NateKinch91]

@@Slick-666 this is a powerful point. One example that springs to mind is the word, nature. Some languages have no equivalent, with the closest being something like our word for ‘everything’. There’s a part of me that feels the Wittgenstein, “the limits of my language are the limits of my world”, sentiment have real resonance here.

[@Slick-666]

@@NateKinch91 Very well said.

[@anopinionatedlaymanappears9052]

A philosopher who can't even accurately interpret the world lol

[@websmink]

Don’t worry Huns, we are all going to die soon

[@Mtnshell56]

What....?