I found this a few days ago. If it is possible to have ETT it would mean being able to go from Montreal to Vancouver in about an hour, from Cairo to Capetown in three, around 2 hours from Beijing to Moscow and less than three from Santiago to Vancouver.
Here is an interesting site concerning ETT technology.
Of course this would have heavy socioeconomic consequences.
The title is a reference to Macintyre, and the reason I make that reference is I believe technology like this will really impact global politics to such an extent that the paradigm shifts resulting from this will cause us to inquire into what type of modernity we have created, where locality will be consumed in an internationalist hegemony and cities become part of one super-city.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Positive Ecology?
One of my core intellectual projects is a to encounter modernity theologically. Specifically in a Christian theology, grounded radically in the resurrection of Jesus and his proclamation of the reign of God, for the practice of the Church.
This big project idea has led me to explore many things: theodicy, transcendance, technology, consumerism, justice, liberation and technology. I now turn to ecology, which I have yet to really think about. What I want to discuss now is positive versus negative approaches to the environment.
By negative approach I mean one that's creed is "we must not destroy the environment". This approach is reflects the ideologies of the Enlightenment and classical liberalism. Just as the individual has rights and must respect the rights of others, so the environment has rights that must be respected. Yet these rights are in the negative, there is no positive relationship to the environment just as there is no positive relationship with society.
By positive I mean an account that, just as communtarian accounts describes society, describes the relationship in terms of commitment and responsibility rather than rights.
When it comes to the bible, was is a good reading to determine between the two?
This big project idea has led me to explore many things: theodicy, transcendance, technology, consumerism, justice, liberation and technology. I now turn to ecology, which I have yet to really think about. What I want to discuss now is positive versus negative approaches to the environment.
By negative approach I mean one that's creed is "we must not destroy the environment". This approach is reflects the ideologies of the Enlightenment and classical liberalism. Just as the individual has rights and must respect the rights of others, so the environment has rights that must be respected. Yet these rights are in the negative, there is no positive relationship to the environment just as there is no positive relationship with society.
By positive I mean an account that, just as communtarian accounts describes society, describes the relationship in terms of commitment and responsibility rather than rights.
When it comes to the bible, was is a good reading to determine between the two?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)