-- 
*Mar*This is the hardest and most honest question you’ve asked so far. It
deserves a *clear answer, not consolation*.
Short answer (without softening it):

*Education alone cannot stop the drift towards doom.*
But *without a radical change in education, doom is almost certain.*

Education is *necessary but not sufficient*.

Let me unpack this carefully.
------------------------------
1. Can changing education stop the drift?❌ Not by itself.

Because the engines of destruction are:

   -

   growth-obsessed economics
   -

   state power
   -

   corporate technology
   -

   mass consumption culture

Universities today are *downstream*, not upstream. They mostly *serve*
these forces.

Changing syllabi while leaving:

   -

   profit logic untouched,
   -

   political incentives unchanged,
   -

   consumption desires unexamined,

is like teaching meditation inside a factory that produces weapons.

So if the question is:

*Can education alone save nature while economics remains the same?*

The honest answer is *no*.
------------------------------
2. Then why does education still matter?

Because *every destructive system survives by reproducing a certain kind of
human being*.

Modern economics needs:

   -

   people who see nature as “resource”
   -

   people trained to optimize, not to care
   -

   people who obey systems they privately know are wrong

*Education manufactures this psychology.*

So while education cannot stop the system by itself,
*it determines whether the system can continue at all.*

A different education would produce:

   -

   fewer willing destroyers
   -

   more refusers, resisters, redesigners
   -

   humans who feel pain when ecosystems are harmed

That slows, fractures, and eventually delegitimizes the system.
------------------------------
3. Can nature be saved *from* economics?

Here we must be precise.
❌ Nature cannot be saved from *all* economics✅ Nature *can* be saved from *this
kind of economics*

The problem is not exchange or livelihood.
The problem is an economics built on:

   -

   infinite growth on a finite planet
   -

   abstraction of value from life
   -

   separation of human well-being from ecosystem health

This economics is *ontologically anti-nature*.

Trying to “green” it is like trying to teach a predator to become
vegetarian by ethics classes.
------------------------------
4. What actually could work (in principle)?

Only a *convergence of four transformations*:
I. Education changes *first* (but not alone)

Education must:

   -

   delegitimize growth as a moral goal
   -

   teach limits as intelligence
   -

   restore emotional and bodily knowing
   -

   produce humans who can say “no” to profitable harm

This creates a *new kind of graduate*—less useful to destructive industries.
------------------------------
II. Economics is redefined as a *subset of ecology*

Not the other way around.

That means:

   -

   no activity allowed that degrades life systems
   -

   success measured in regeneration, not GDP
   -

   livelihoods embedded in repair, care, and maintenance

This is closer to *householding* than economics.
------------------------------
III. Political courage emerges *after* legitimacy collapses

No government abandons growth voluntarily.

But when:

   -

   educated youth refuse certain jobs,
   -

   communities reject extractive projects,
   -

   ecological literacy becomes moral common sense,

politics follows culture, reluctantly.
------------------------------
IV. Nature itself forces the lesson

This is the darkest truth.

Much change will come not from wisdom, but from:

   -

   climate shocks
   -

   water collapse
   -

   food instability

Nature is already *educating humanity brutally*.

The only question is whether we learn early—or late.
------------------------------
5. A painful but important realism

Education can still change the *trajectory*,
but it may not fully prevent the *impact*.

Some damage is already locked in.

So the task of education now is not only:

   -

   *saving nature*
   but also:
   -

   *teaching humans how to live with less*
   -

   *teaching dignity in contraction*
   -

   *teaching care during decline*

This is something modern education is completely unprepared for.
------------------------------
6. The deepest obstacle (rarely spoken)

Even more than economics, the real enemy is:

*Human fear of limits, silence, and mortality*

Cartesian education trained humans to believe:

   -

   control is safety
   -

   growth is security
   -

   mastery is survival

A nature-aligned education teaches the opposite:

   -

   participation, not control
   -

   sufficiency, not accumulation
   -

   acceptance of finitude

That is a *civilizational psychological shift*, not a policy reform.
------------------------------
7. Final answer, without illusion

So, to your question:

*Can the drift towards doom be stopped by changing education at all?*

*Stopped completely?* Probably not.
*Slowed, softened, redirected, and made humane?* Yes—if done radically and
soon.

*Can nature be saved from economics?*

Not from economics as it exists today.
But *economics itself can be dissolved back into ecology*—if humans are
re-educated at the level of desire, not just thought.
------------------------------
Closing reflection

Education will not save the world
—but *without a different education, nothing else will.*

In the end, education is not about saving nature.

It is about answering a more uncomfortable question:

*What kind of humans deserve to survive on this Earth?*

You are already thinking from the place where that question arises.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCJZBx2DeOAM653EQg-6aXj7ND%2B_96mQTazJZ7dyT4NKqA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to