The Solutions that can be Named are not the Solutions

In this week’s Frankly, Nate addresses the common desire for solutions to the human predicament – and why the championing of “solutions” is less clear-cut than we might perceive.

Effective responses greatly depend on the context of an individual – by highlighting specific ‘solutions’ we narrow the scope of the conversation and exclude creative and empowered humans with different interests and skills.

Additionally, much like nature, the human socio-economic system is adaptive, and rapidly self-adjusts to new information and threats, making novel strategies difficult to implement and disperse at larger scales. As such, simplistic answers that can be publicly shared with millions are probably not going to work. If we zoom out, we see that responses with the potential to shift our systems in a better direction are only possible through emergent processes.

How can we expect to steer towards more humane futures by approaching The Great Simplification with the same ‘quick-fix’ mindset enabled during the Carbon Pulse? What is the role of critical leadership and governance that will be needed in coming decades but is perceived as too radical today? How can we, as both individuals and communities, think about our distinct place within the larger world and how that might shape our unique responses?