iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by @michele2e.bsky.social

Michaël Aime @mikamika85.eurosky.social · 24/11/2024

J'ai cru m'étouffer avec une métaphore aussi éclaté que ses poires... comme quoi, en tartinant d'un peu de culture on peut donner n'importe quel argument. L'écologie punitive elle va nous tomber dessus tte seule, la nature s'en chargera.

001

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 16/07/2026

Ne faudrait-il pas aussi analyser le volet philosophique de ce tract ? Par ex., il tait la lutte du vivant contre la Terre, pourtant le fondement de l’habitabilité. Si, comme je le pense, cet impensé explique à lui seul la crise écologique, constitutionnaliser l’habitabilité serait problématique.

100

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 06/07/2026

La vie rend la Terre habitable. Oui, mais comment ? Il y a 3 ans, j’alertais les chercheurs sur la lutte du vivant contre la Terre, un fait passé sous silence. C’est exactement l’occultation de Laurent Neyret et Baptisite Morizot qui détruit leur argumentaire aujourd’hui.

100

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 06/07/2026

100

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 29/06/2026

Encore une perte de temps malgré l'urgence de la crise écologique. Derrière une nouvelle bonne cause qu'on va mettre un certain temps à déconstruire, une régression de plus. www.babelio.com/livres/Neyre...

babelio.com

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 05/06/2026

Depuis 12 ans, je développe une représentation du monde où la biodiversité (ce qui englobe) lutte contre l’environnement (ce qui cerne). Il semble que l’on y vient petit à petit. J’aurais aimé être mentionné ici. @lorene-lavocat.bsky.social

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 25/04/2026

Better to understand evolution (Darwinism) by seeing that life (not only IQ, but also living beings bodies) is self-artificial and confronts the universe. This avoids the current survivorship bias. But it requires challenging ourselves before pointing at others. A choice that I believe is ecology.

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 25/04/2026

Got it, thx. But that doesn't mention Darwin. IMHO, the narrative that (1) natural selection exists, then (2) “IQ” matched it with an artificial selection, while (3) others only did unconscious selection is a "IQ" fairy tale that frameworks eugenics.

100

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 24/04/2026

Isn’t this closer to social Darwinism than to eugenics? And doesn’t it point to a much larger problem: that our current scientific and societal reading of Darwinism as “survival of the fittest” is nothing else than a profound, gigantic and dystopian form of survivorship bias?

100

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 07/11/2025

I believe once ecology reveals that our family, all the living, resists the universe, and this becomes new common sense, it will discredit centralized constructs that fail to worship united diversity. Environmentalists gotta work this through but.

010

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 07/11/2025

I believe in idea-society coevolving & think environmentalism today can play a big role in helping yesterday's social liberalism by perfecting the definition of freedom. Freedom is first the essence of life, its emancipation from the universe (apparition, capability to survive it, to move, etc.)

110

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 27/09/2025

"That may be a source of dismay for anyone who still believed the argument for a cleaner, safer, more equitable future can be won by reason alone" I so strongly disagree. Get our reason right and people will follow. medium.com/the-environm...

medium.com

Book Review: The Many Lives of James Lovelock by Jonathan Watts

An “anti-biography” that didn’t asked the right question

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 08/09/2025

Is a river alive or Robert Macfarlane our new Carlos Castaneda? medium.com/the-new-clim...

010

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 04/09/2025

In my mind, that's between people who can or can't resist all the bio-skepticism that hides the fact that life, our family, struggles for itself against the universe (Earth included). Empathy is unfortunately only a stopgap.

120

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 16/07/2025

Terracotta tripod with its bouquet and repurposed plastic container. Trépied en terre cuite, son bouquet, et un contenant plastique revisité Treppiede in terracotta, il suo bouquet e un contenitore di plastica revisitato

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 17/05/2025

We've got the same problem in environmentalism, still trotting out the elderly 'save the Earth' motto, which never worked. It has even passed its expiration date in recent years. Everybody knows that...

000

Reposted by @michele2e.bsky.social

WePlanet Australia @weplanetaus.bsky.social · 07/05/2025

The elephant in the climate space is the cow - @georgemonbiot.bsky.social Innovations in food technologies mean we can now produce the foods we love with a fraction of the environmental impact. But for farmers, producers & consumers to benefit, we need our government to act. shorturl.at/JMy71

youtube.com

The climate solution that is being ignored // ft. George Monbiot.

YouTube video by WePlanet Australia

520062

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 17/04/2025

This naturalist amendment will be a solid apocalypse, uniting life against the rest and bridging social and natural sciences. It's a simple idea, accessible to people from all sides (another plus, it will raise our side and weaken the opposite ones). If you're curious, I'd be happy to explain more.

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 17/04/2025

We can simply amend our naturalism by understanding that life - in reality - contends with the universe (and Earth) and that makes it the true anti-nature (all living beings and not only human is social matter).

110

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 17/04/2025

In fact, conflating the notions of life and Earth is coming from our naturalism. Animism won't help much. I deeply think it is way better and much easier to work from inside our naturalist boundaries...

120

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 17/04/2025

Dear Astra, a remark on your text. I believe our current green narrative conflating the notions of life and Earth is also, in fine (semantically and logically) treasonous to life, hence treasonous to our world.

100

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 17/04/2025

The authors call for another apocalypse than the current catastrophe. Recognizing life's struggle against the earth is one. Contrary to the illogical conflation of those two notions, it can really be thought. It is easy and should be a peaceful apocalypse: it asserts we belong to life.

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 13/04/2025

Sorry David, thx for the input! My bad. I meant to say that if human nature is as the subtitle suggests, then political debates and articles like this are inherently pointless. Give us a corrected framework, one that moves beyond flawed naturalism, and we'll have a chance to make a difference

010

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 13/04/2025

Is the subtitle from George? I don't think so. I strongly disagree. There's no such thing as human nature; we are culture (in flesh and spirit). Give us the right framework to see the real, and we'll follow. We can achieve a lot of good.

110

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 02/04/2025

Dear Richard, please ask George tonight about his last chapter, where he asserts, with no solid scientific basis, that the "living planet" concept is a natural language? I researched why this conflation of life and Earth, it is on the contrary a deliberate neoliberal obfuscation of life!

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 31/03/2025

Like George's writings, this article diminishes life by conflating it with nature. This is problematic and confusing: the article criticizes 'nature-based solutions' as bad, but advocates for 'working with nature'. A more enlightening expression here would be something like 'coworking with life'.

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 31/03/2025

I agree with but also disagree with many points. A few cautionary suggestions: The authors rely on George Monbiot's writings to challenge the appeal of the "natural element". Good but beware, George himself uses this appeal (rather than science) for his own purposes medium.com/the-environm...

medium.com

Dear George Monbiot, What makes you certain that Earth is a living planet?

Is the “living planet” an unecological and epistemically violent ideology?

130

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 31/03/2025

This book fails to grasp that 'freedom' began when living beings broke free from the universe.

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 27/03/2025

The invisible doctrine conflates the concepts of life and Earth, deeming this conflation natural. However, this remains debatable and warrants discussion, as if incorrect, it could have even more pernicious consequences than neoliberalism. Can u ask George please? medium.com/the-environm...

medium.com

Dear George Monbiot, What makes you certain that Earth is a living planet?

Is the “living planet” an unecological and epistemically violent ideology?

100

Reposted by @michele2e.bsky.social

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 16/03/2025

Dear George, pitting values (and subjectivity) against economic growth is highly counterproductive. Why doing that? I hope you'll consider exploring the more scientific life versus Earth narrative where values, social and ecological, come as an added bonus.

021

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 16/03/2025

021

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 11/03/2025

George, shouldn't we also account for the entirely new challenges arising from transgressing planetary boundaries. In other words, shouldn't we need to shift from the outdated, psychopathic notion of life competing against life to the more sound concept of life struggling against the Earth/universe.

010

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 08/03/2025

Hi! Looks like Patrick is suggesting that those public lands are intended for perpetuating the wilderness tradition, to contrasts with the Lockean tradition of progress?

000

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 06/03/2025

Hmm, a note of caution: viewing Earth as vile (futurism) or good (current environmentalism) represents two sides of the same old coin, namely, geocentrism which thinks earth=earth+life (sic). This essay is great but overlooks this crucial ecological point.

010

michele2e.bsky.social @michele2e.bsky.social · 05/03/2025

@lucas-sabean.bsky.social Hi Lucas Sabean, Congratulations and best wishes on the invisible doctrine movie! I have a thought to share, to further the reflection (perhaps you've already come across it, I'm not sure). medium.com/the-environm...

medium.com

Dear George Monbiot, What makes you certain that Earth is a living planet? (Suite)

The issue isn’t that “Living Planet” wrongly implies Earth is alive, but that it is a red herring, obscuring the fact life fights the Earth

000