We live on a planet completely transformed by humanity. Our impacts upon the planet are so great that scientists have now coined a term for a new geological age – the Anthropocene. We are changing the climate, the chemical balance of the oceans and soils, biodiversity and even the physical structure of the planet –humans move more sediment and rock than all natural processes combined. Together this is referred to as ‘global change’. Whether we like it or not, and whether we are conscious of it or not, we are designing the future of not just our species, but every other species on the planet.
In this blog and the next I argue that Contextual Behavioural Science is not just a tool for individual wellbeing, it is a tool for global transformation. For future generations to live meaningfully, happily and sustainably, we must master our thinking and feeling at least as much as we have learned to master the physical world. We need to more consciously evolve our behaviour, choosing our evolutionary path instead of reacting unconsciously.
Getting better at choosing is critical for many of our most pressing problems, but nowhere is it more important than the choices we make about our treatment of the natural world. The natural world is the context for everything else: It is the cradle of our development as a species, the support system for our thriving today and the legacy we leave our children.
Evolution has provided us with great strategies for coping quickly with simple, short-term, and individual challenges, but these very strategies get in the way of coping with complex, long-term and collective challenges. In this blog, I outline some of the reasons we seem to be so ineffective at collectively responding to anthropogenic changes to the natural world. Next week I will explore some ways contextual behavioural science can help us to respond more effectively to such wicked problems.
Why cant we get our act together?
From a contextual behavioural perspective, human beings have at least six characteristics that get in the way of successfully responding to complex problems . These characteristics served us well in old contexts, but might just be big problems for our ongoing survival.
Responding to reinforcement
a) Immediate consequences outweigh delayed consequences – we might be concerned about the fate of our children, but we tend to act on our desire for that new car or second helping of food right now.
b) Strongly unpleasant stimuli presented abruptly prompt action, but gradually increasing unpleasant stimuli do not – This is the story of the boiled frog. So long as global conditions worsen gradually, we will tolerate bad air, foul water, and species loss that would once have been considered intolerable.
Complexity and Accuracy of Thinking
c) Simple, familiar ideas are often preferred over complex, alien ideas that are more correct. It is estimated that evolution, about as well-established a fact as it is possible to obtain in science, is rejected by 46% of the American population, one of the best educated populations on earth. This figure doesn’t appear to be changing – there is a limit to the power of science and education, in part because…
d) Coincidental events often strengthen ineffective behavior – Short term weather events lead to claims that climate change isn’t happening. Our cognitive systems are tuned to use even random patterns as evidence supporting our beliefs.
e) Thinking more complexly puts us in contact with uncertainty and paradox which can both feel aversive – As we learn language we are repeatedly rewarded for being coherent : Parents discourage children for saying they like spinach one day and not the next. Uncertainty, ignorance and inconsistent beliefs feel deeply aversive for most of us and thinking about complex environmental issues inevitably exposes us to these states.
f) Consequences for the individual usually outweigh consequences for others – although we can and do act altruistically, our primary concern is usually to protect ourselves and satisfy our own needs.
So what can we do about it?
This is a pretty depressing list. But actually these characteristics are just the products of human evolution. Evolution has provided us with great strategies for coping quickly with simple, short-term, and individual challenges, but these very strategies get in the way of coping with complex, long-term and collective challenges.
But what makes human beings really interesting are the times when we act differently to the basic tendencies outlined above. Next week I will explore how ACT and contextual behavioural science help us to make sense of what happens when we are at our best as a species – when we plan well for the future and act beyond our own self-interest.
Between now and then, you might like to see if you can notice examples of these evolved tendencies in action. How do they serve you and how do they get in the way of living the life you want to live? I would love to read about what you notice.
1. Chance, P. (2007). The ultimate challenge: prove B. F. Skinner wrong. The Behavior analyst, 30(2), 153-160. Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc2203635/
2. Hughes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Vahey, N. (2012). Holding On to Our Functional Roots When Exploring New Intellectual Islands: A Voyage through Implicit Cognition Research. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 1, 17-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2012.09.003. Available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144712000075