Conversation Recorded on June 27th, 2023)
On this segment of Reality Roundtable, Nate is joined by William Rees, Nora Bateson, and Rex Weyler to discuss the purpose of ecology and what it might look like to have a civilization centered around it. Despite our tendency to think of ourselves as separate from the biosphere, humans are a part of it, just like any other animal. What sets us apart now is our outsized impact on the world around us, as we and our societies take up more space and resources, degrading the ecosystems that support ourselves, our descendants, and other species. How can an understanding of systems and relationships help us rethink how we interact with the planet? Could ecologically literate governments and citizens create wider boundaries across time and space in which decisions are made? What might the parameters be for a civilization centered around ecology, and how can we navigate there through declining energy and resource availability? Most of all, how can we as individuals and communities root ourselves into a deep(er) ecological knowledge and way of being?
About Nora Bateson
Nora Bateson is an award-winning filmmaker, writer and educator, as well as President of the International Bateson Institute, based in Sweden. Her work asks the question “How can we improve our perception of the complexity we live within, so we may improve our interaction with the world?”.
An international lecturer, researcher and writer, Nora wrote, directed and produced the award-winning documentary, An Ecology of Mind, a portrait of her father, Gregory Bateson. Her work brings the fields of biology, cognition, art, anthropology, psychology, and information technology together into a study of the patterns in ecology of living systems. Her book, Small Arcs of Larger Circles, released by Triarchy Press, UK, 2016 is a revolutionary personal approach to the study of systems and complexity.
About William Rees
William Rees is a population ecologist, ecological economist, Professor Emeritus and former Director of the University of British Columbia’s School of Community and Regional Planning in Vancouver, Canada. He researches the implications of global ecological trends for the longevity of civilization, with special focus on urban (un)sustainability and cultural/cognitive barriers to rational public policy. Prof Rees is best known as the originator and co-developer with Dr Mathis Wackernagel of ‘ecological footprint analysis’ (EFA), a quantitative tool that estimates human demands on ecosystems and the extent to which humanity is in ‘ecological overshoot.’ Dr Rees is a founding member and former President of the Canadian Society for Ecological Economics; a founding Director of the OneEarth Living Initiative; an Advisor for the Post-Carbon Institute and an Associate Fellow of the Great Transition Initiative.
About Rex Weyler
Rex Weyler is a writer and ecologist. His books include Blood of the Land; the Government and Corporate War Against First Nations, nominated for a Pulitzer Prize; Greenpeace: The Inside Story, a finalist for the BC Book Award and the Shaughnessy-Cohen Award for Political Writing; and The Jesus Sayings, a deconstruction of first century history, a finalist for the BC Book Award.
In the 1970s, Weyler was a cofounder of Greenpeace International and editor of the Greenpeace Chronicles. He served on campaigns to preserve rivers and forests and to stop whaling, sealing, and toxic dumping.
He currently posts the “Deep Green” column at the Greenpeace International website. He lives on Cortes Island in British Columbia, with his wife, artist Lisa Gibbons.
Watch on YouTube
Show Notes & Links to Learn More:
00:00 – Nora Bateson’s Warm Data and TGS Episode, William Rees’ works and TGS Episode, Rex Weyler’s Deep Green essays index and TGS Episode
01:58 – Ecology
04:18 – Emergence
05:12 – Dissipative Structures (Section 1.3)
07:59 – Endosomatic/exosomatic energy
10:04 – Bio-semiotics
12:50 – 1st Order, 2nd Order, Nth order
14:01 – Moth camouflaged as birds of prey
17:27 – Copernican Revolution
18:51 – Rachel Carson Silent Spring
19:28 – Taoism
20:08 – Divine Efficacy
21:05 – Humans and livestock are taking up 96% of space on Earth
25:17 – Sierra Club
27:00 – Mental models and human constructs
28:10 – A repeated concept forms synaptic circuits that block out competing information
30:27 – Microbiome, Mycelia and Tree relationships
31:52 – Charles Sanders Pierce
32:45 – Humans have more bacterial cells than their own cells
37:32 – Overshoot
40:26 – Daniel Schmachtenberger TGS Episode
46:26 – Map is not the territory, Korzybski
47:21 – Negative and Positive Feedbacks
47:30 – The fossil abundance has provided the resource for human population to explode
48:32 – Circular Economy
50:47 – Esalen Community
53:22 – Redundancy
56:52 – Contraction of the human species is inevitable
1:01:30 – Energy consumption 100 years ago
1:03:45 – Declining fossil fuel accessibility
1:04:35 – Ways to ethically and slowly decline global population
1:09:25 – Eugenics
1:11:59 – Stephen Gaskin
1:14:03 – British Columbia made all contraception completely free
1:14:50 – Pro-Natalists
1:20:20 – Russo-Ukraine War risks
1:21:10 – Nuclear Fallout risks
1:25:31 – Laws of Thermodynamics
1:25:36 – The Arrogance of Humanism
1:28:25 – Tautology
Teaser photo credit: By Snežana Trifunović – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2647911. By Snežana Trifunović – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2647911
Comments
Welcome to the new Resillience commenting system!
We have moved from the former Disqus commenting system to a new system as of September 10, 2026.
We made this change because of privacy concerns regarding Disqus. It's also part of a set of changes to bring more services to the Resilience community under a single login: commenting, (coming September 2026), and online courses (coming 2027). Unfortunately, your old Disqus comments may not reliably link to your account in this new system. Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns.
From here: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2017.0376
“the fact that non-equilibrium self-organization in open systems requires the dissipation of energy, Prigogine coined the term ‘dissipative structures’, so as to distinguish them from equilibrium structures [3,10]. The conditions for dissipative structures are readily encountered in living systems, which are (i) open, (ii) governed by nonlinear evolution equations, and (iii) operate far from thermodynamic equilibrium”.
Dissipative entities maintain their character by use of a low-entropy energy supply which is then dissipated and rejected as high-entropy waste energy. For example, energy from the sun in the form of visible light is partly absorbed by a plant for use in photosynthesis, but the same amount of energy leaves the plant in the form of infra-red radiation.
Energy dissipation is at the core of trophic cascades, which are characteristic of the interactions of many species in a particular environmental niche.
The vast majority of energy dissipated by living systems comes from the sun, although there are some species (mostly single cell) that live in the deep ocean or underground use other sources of energy found in places like hydrothermal vents.
The actual mechanism of dissipation can be very complicated and take many forms as described in the attached article.
I asked Chat GPT.
Me:
What are dissipative structures in biology and ecology?
ChatGPT:
Dissipative structures, as originally described by the theoretical physicist Ilya Prigogine, are a concept applied to the fields of biology and ecology. These structures are self-organizing systems that maintain a stable state and generate complexity by exchanging energy and matter with their environment. They exist far from thermodynamic equilibrium, meaning they require a constant flow of energy and matter to maintain their organization and activity.
In biology, dissipative structures refer to self-organizing systems found in living organisms. Living systems, such as cells, organisms, and ecosystems, are considered dissipative structures because they continuously exchange energy, nutrients, and waste products with their surroundings to maintain their organization and function. These systems exhibit a high level of complexity and order, despite being open and dynamic.
In ecology, dissipative structures can be observed at different levels of organization, ranging from individual species to entire ecosystems. Ecosystems, for example, can be seen as dissipative structures as they require a continuous input of energy (usually from the sun) and exchange of matter (such as nutrients and water) to sustain their diverse interactions and maintain their stability and functioning. The flow of energy and matter through ecosystems helps maintain their structure and supports the complex web of relationships between organisms.
Dissipative structures in biology and ecology highlight the importance of energy flow and dynamic interactions with the environment in maintaining order and complexity. They provide a framework for understanding how living systems can organize and adapt to changing conditions, and they have significant implications for the study of biological systems and ecological dynamics.
Me:
Some people say that the now globalized industrial civilization is akin to a superorganism which exhibits the features of a dissipative structure. Is this a valid perspective?
ChatGPT:
The idea of comparing the globalized industrial civilization to a dissipative structure or a superorganism is an interesting perspective that has been discussed by some thinkers. However, it’s important to note that this perspective is subject to interpretation and debate, and different individuals may have varying opinions on its validity.
From one point of view, one could argue that the globalized industrial civilization exhibits some characteristics of a dissipative structure. Like a dissipative structure, our civilization is a complex and interconnected system that requires a continuous input of energy and resources to sustain its functioning. It involves the exchange of goods, services, information, and ideas across borders and relies on networks of production, consumption, and communication. The flow of energy and resources within this system can be seen as analogous to the energy and matter exchanges in a dissipative structure.
Furthermore, similar to a dissipative structure, our global civilization has shown the ability to self-organize and adapt to changing circumstances. It has evolved and transformed over time, developing new technologies, economic systems, and social structures to maintain its organization and meet its needs.
However, it’s important to recognize that comparing a human civilization to a dissipative structure or a superorganism is an analogy, and there are significant differences between the two. While a dissipative structure is a natural, self-organizing system that emerges spontaneously, a civilization is a human construct influenced by social, cultural, and political factors. Human societies are also characterized by complex decision-making processes, diverse ideologies, and individual agency, which may not align perfectly with the concept of a dissipative structure.
Moreover, the analogy of a dissipative structure may oversimplify the complexities and challenges associated with our global civilization, such as social inequalities, environmental degradation, and ethical considerations. These factors may require different conceptual frameworks and approaches for analysis and understanding.
In summary, while some people may find the comparison of our globalized industrial civilization to a dissipative structure intriguing and thought-provoking, it is important to approach this perspective with a critical and nuanced mindset. It can offer insights into the complex dynamics of our civilization, but it should not be taken as an absolute or definitive description of our societal structure.
I think ChatGPT did OK with the first question, although it just repeated itself three times. The answer to the second question should have simply been “yes” rather than the hedging and pablum of its answer.
In my opinion, ChatGPT gave a more nuanced and historical materialist answer to the old “nature vs culture” debate here than any of the human participants in this video did. Which is kind of terrifying to me, in more ways than one.
The guests made a lot of thought provoking observations. Unfortunately, they are all badly lacking familiarity with one potentially vitally useful tool: historical materialism.
Most people who have heard that term assume its extent is limited exclusively to classical Marxism. But when you ask the question, “what would an ecological civilization look like?”, shouldn’t you inquire into actual previous cultures and civilizations, some of which managed to achieve remarkable levels of intellectual sophistication and even relative physical comfort, and in some cases lasting on the order of millennia , despite remarkably limited material resources? (Tibet and Ladakh until well into the 20th century come to mind.) And what were/are the economic,social, and spiritual mechanisms that allowed for such success stories? (Call them the “sociological software”, to use a contemporary metaphor.)
Nora is also unduly dismissive of “intentional communities”, an enormously broad term. Her expressed fears of some kind of top down authoritarianism spoiling a beautiful, imagined spontaneity betrays a somewhat uniquely North American kind of hyperindividualist libertarianism.
We should instead realize the all too common incongruity and I dare say pathology of some of the most coddled, richest people in human history constantly expressing their morbidly obsessive fears of their individual style and imagined “freedom” becoming cramped in any way.
In fact, in the largest sense, any kind of humane approach to the ecological crisis will involve large scale “intentionality” and “top down solutions” the likes of which the most powerful and wealthiest individuals on our planet have sworn a blood oath to crush, using any and all means at their disposal. And one of the most powerful weapons at their disposal is the command of (ironically!) oligarchically controlled economic and ideological machinery the likes of which would leave Joseph Stalin gaping in astonishment.