The First Step to Behavioral Change
Overlook on Whiteface Veterans Memorial Highway
What is the first step to behavioral change? The first step is seeing and admitting that there is an issue that needs to be addressed - acceptance. Prior to acceptance, denial, anger, depression, and bargaining are the stages of grief that one goes through upon realizing that something has been lost. The items that most people frequently associate with grief and loss are addiction and death. So, it shouldn't be very surprising when one understands that our addiction to technology use (see this and this) is just as deadly as any other addiction.
The one thing that most people do rather than reach acceptance is to continue going back and forth through the stages of grief and/or occasionally plateau on the bargaining stage for an extended period of time. Once it becomes obvious that this won't accomplish anything and when it becomes too painful for the person to continue the stages of grief, only then will they come to acceptance in order to move forward. Establishing new behavioral patterns can be rather difficult, which is why many people often experience relapse. Understanding that external change can only come from internal change is key.
It is now a given that the systems surrounding us have reached tipping points and are now in the process of changing how they function. Some of the systems supply our energy and resources to us and some of them use those resources along with renewable resources to provide our food and necessary ecosystem services. It's beyond late to try to address the predicaments we face but there are still many people who think we can somehow avoid the worst. Of course, from my perspective, we're already here at the peak of civilization and it's only going to get worse from here on out. I just don't see an ability to avoid the inevitable outcome of collapse and die-off, and I see potential survival after a potential bottleneck as something very few souls will embrace once they truly comprehend what that actually entails.
Understanding why addiction is so prevalent within the confines of civilization is important. Many talk about "gateway drugs" for instance. I don't think there is such a thing - I think that we have gateway conditions that lead to drug use which then often turn into drug abuse. This then leads to dependence, either psychological or physical, known as addiction. These gateway conditions are actually a part of civilization known as trauma. Some people do not have a full set of coping skills in their tool box to deal with this trauma, so drugs and/or other addictions become their way of coping with life's ups and downs.
How long does it take for someone to become addicted? Some drugs are so addictive that one time is all it takes. But we must face the fact that drugs are only one type of addiction. Substance abuse is widespread and not limited to drugs. Technology use, on the other hand, is a whole different matter. Nobody can see it for what it is because everyone within civilization is using it and we are utterly dependent upon it. However, it wasn't always this way as Tom Murphy points out here that I originally included in my last article. What this means as we fall down the Seneca Cliff is that we are in for a very nasty withdrawal from said technology use.
Withdrawal symptoms in a physical sense can be anywhere from mild to deadly. Most people rarely if ever think about what will happen when they lose electrical power. Get the power inverter fired up or the generator started and go buy some gasoline. Of course, if this is just a small, local outage, then getting gas somewhere outside of the neighborhood is no big deal. But nowadays, small, local outages are becoming more rare as larger local and/or regional outages become more common. This means that not only gas will be in short supply if one can even buy it, but also most other supplies, including food and water and possibly even toilets that work.
Now, for those who are completely off-grid, this may not apply to you at your property. But right there is where it ends - the rest of civilization utterly depends on the grid, meaning that everything you routinely purchase and/or utilize outside of your property will either be unavailable now or in short order. Remember the COVID-19 pandemic, where the supply chains all broke down and items you were used to purchasing were no longer available, many for weeks, months, and even years afterwards. Some items never came back because the businesses or companies which manufactured or wholesaled them went out of business or otherwise quit selling certain products.
In a new article from Dave Pollard (part of a series he is working on about the signs of collapse), he explains how increasing security is attempting to protect frontline workers from citizen outrage caused by collapse. Perhaps today's society is finally beginning to realize that civilization doesn't really serve most people any longer the way the convenient cultural narratives claim. In this article from Justin McAffee, he explains precisely what happened with Cahokia, the Mississippian Mound Builders. He shows how they opted out of the system that no longer served them. This is also what will happen as time moves forward now with what we know as modernity (our current civilization). Art Berman takes this a step further in this article by demonstrating how it is our very thinking that got us into this mess, as I have explained many times. However, another important item that Art explains is one where Justin misunderstands the scenario. In Justin's article, he describes how agriculture doesn't require civilization. Art shows us how that was how it was in the past, but now no longer will be possible, quote:
"A rarely acknowledged threat is the breakdown of the stable climate that made agriculture — and civilization — possible. Hunter-gatherers in the late Pleistocene began experimenting with planting seeds and managing wild plants as early as 23,000 years ago, but the unstable climate made this early cultivation unreliable. Agriculture only became viable with the onset of the Holocene, which provided 12,000 years of relatively stable, predictable weather (see Figure 4). That stability is now breaking down. Weather has become more chaotic, extremes more frequent, and the foundations of our food systems — rainfall, soil fertility, and growing seasons — are unraveling.
Reductionist models that focus solely on emissions or temperature targets overlook the deeper crisis: the destabilization of the Earth systems that made civilization possible. Those who claim rising CO2 will boost crop yields ignore this reality. Without a stable climate, there will be no reliable crops — fertilizer won’t change that."
Notice the constant use of certain narratives that tend to make the predicaments we face sound more optimistic than they really are. In this sense, I shall provide yet another article pointing to this phenomenon, this time with the "abundance" narrative. Ultimately, all these narratives are really nothing more than denial of reality. They may sound great and people ignorant of the actual reality might buy into them, but they are nothing more than illusions - popular narratives which don't hold up under scrutiny. Speaking of which, Eliot Jacobson has a new article out addressing this very issue.
One last issue that I want to point out before wrapping things up for today. People need to understand that we are not in control here, and that nature is. The mass extinction unfolding all around us is speeding out of control, and it will take us with it. Take a look at the parallels and speed of the current mass extinction versus the largest-known one in history.
The bottom line here is that the first step to behavioral change is to admit the reality to ourselves - acceptance is required. Once that has been achieved, the denial, anger, depression, blaming, and bargaining can be seen exactly for what they are - non-acceptance - which doesn't change any of the facts surrounding these predicaments. One can get mad or sad about gravity, deny the existence of gravity, blame someone or something else for it, or even try to negotiate with it. But the fact that gravity exists will continue unfazed by any of that, making those items an exercise in futility. See this article about bargaining for the unmasking of the truth.
On a more positive note, there are things to look forward to. Here two entries which allude to this, the Blue Ridge Discovery Center and Mount Airy! Enjoy!
I'm not sure what kind of behaviour you're thinking we could change to and what effect that might have on our predicament.
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned people living off the grid but Jessica Wildfire explains why no-one lives completely off the grid. https://www.the-sentinel-intelligence.net/nobody-lives-off-the-grid/
Sorry, inadvertently posted a comment anonymously. It was about what behaviours to change to and that no-one lives off-grid.
ReplyDeleteWe're addicted to technology use. All addicts have the ability to reconcile reality, accept that reality, and change their behavior accordingly to make positive change in their lives. One step at a time - simplify one's life by reducing one's technology use. Of course, most people will probably reject this idea, but there are quite a few who can and will embrace it. For more info, visit the Low Tech website or buy their book: https://www.notechmagazine.com/low-tech-magazine-the-printed-website
DeleteAgreed, we are addicted to technology. But we have no free will so can't simply choose to end the addiction, our brain make up needs to alter in order to make different decisions. That can happen independently of others if our current brain arrangement gets us to investigate the issue and have new information make those new neuron connections. It can happen by external means with others, or the environment, inputting information that our brains are attentive to. Or it may happen through drugs.
DeleteBut having accepted our addiction, what would be the positive change we could make and why would it be positive? How can it affect our predicament?
Well, I agree that we lack free will. However, I don't think that prevents one from tackling an addiction. Addiction is a matter of choice - one can simply choose not to continue it.
DeleteTechnology addiction is an addiction that combines behavioral choice with a lack of agency. Some of the technologies that we depend upon are beyond our ability to discontinue using. Others are within our control to discontinue using because we don't depend on them in order to live our lives. So, making choices to avoid using technology where and when it isn't really necessary can be helpful. Admittedly, few will make this choice, but it IS possible.
As for how this will affect overshoot, if a majority of the world's people started to reduce their technology use by opting out in this way, overshoot might be reduced as a result. I don't see this as being likely, of course, just that it is a possibility. The bottom line to keep in mind is that this still doesn't or wouldn't solve anything.
Well, your first and third sentences are contradictory. If we don't have free will then we can't choose to do something that our brains aren't wired for. It's the brain that makes the decision (which isn't really a decision in the sense that it could have decided something else, because that would require different wiring in the brain).
DeleteA different decision is only possible (actually, certain) once the wiring in the brain is changed to one where that different decision is made. I've made reference to some of the ways that the brain wiring can be changed.
Overshoot is overshoot. Reducing how far we've overshot might make it possible to reduce further in order to eliminate overshoot but if we're still in overshoot, it doesn't make much difference, as far as I can tell. The environment that supports us will still continue degrading. And predicaments don't have solutions anyway. We await the outcome.
Technology is unsustainable (unless it is a spear made with fallen branches and stones) so reducing the amount of technology we use (especially, but not only, if just some people do so) will not affect that. All modern technology will go away. That is inevitable with only the timeline being uncertain.
Maybe you're right, although I don't tend to think that my brain is being rewired when I make a different decision. My statement comes from personal experience, as I used to be a nicotine addict back in the day. Once I finally made the decision to quit, I haven't used it since. I simply chose a different coping mechanism to deal with stress rather than using nicotine. I've made many similar decisions regarding technology use, where I have rejected using items that aren't really necessary.
DeleteAccording to your statement, my brain gets rewired very frequently, as I make different decisions all the time. Being a journeyman electrician, I don't think of "rewiring" like what I think you are saying, however.
That's the problem with this reality. It feels like we have free will. Although we know that some people have physical brain damage which profoundly affects their behaviours, we still think that there is some non-physical force which "we" control giving "us" the ability to make decisions regardless of how our brain is wired. I find it difficult to come to grips with the reality of this.
DeleteMany scientist have written about this but the book "Determined: A life without free will" by the neurologist Robert Sapolsky really convinced me of this reality. He uses many strands to make the case but the biggest factor for me was that our bodies, including our brains, are made out of physical stuff which follows the laws of nature, of physics. Our brains develop in the way it does due to a myriad of influences. Genes, culture, upbringing, environment, how we slept, what we ate, what the weather was like yesterday. Basically everything that happened prior to our making a decision influenced the arrangement of neurons and neurotransmitters.
None of us has to mystical other force that allows us via some non-physical means to control how the various neurons in our brain fires.
You don't make different decisions. You make exactly the decisions you make. Each of them couldn't have been any other decision because that would require a different sequence of neurons firing. That you seemed to make a different decision with the same apparent conditions means that either the conditions were not the same or that the prior decision, and its consequences, somehow altered the neural network, resulting in a different sequence of neurons firing the next time around.
The lack of free will permeates a lot of my blog posts but these address it directly:
https://mikerobertsblog.wordpress.com/2024/12/27/life-without-free-will/
https://mikerobertsblog.wordpress.com/2025/03/15/still-holding-out-for-free-will/
Thanks, Mike. I've included material from Sapolsky (including his book and interview videos) here in previous articles. Still, I insist that making a different decision IS possible, as literally millions of addicts who have changed their lifestyle and turned their lives around attest. So, it is rather clear to me that rewiring the brain isn't as difficult as some might believe. I just call it learning.
Delete