Let's Check & Let's Analyze_ULOb_WEEK 4-5

1) The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), often called the worldwide Goals, were approved by
the global organization in 2015 as a universal call to action to finish poverty, safeguard the
environment, and make sure that everyone lives in peace and prosperity by 2030. Its goal is to
eradicate poverty and improve people's lives round the world without depleting resources for future
generations.

2) The environmental footprint of countries across the world is measured in "global hectares" (gha). It's
an all-encompassing metric that includes resource consumption, waste, and emissions.

3) Growth has long been regarded to be the most straightforward way to alleviate poverty. For nearly
70 years, growth had been the most essential goal of progress, yet it appeared to be ineffectual in
reducing the number of poor families and individuals.

4) The annual barrier for supporting life on Earth is 1.9 global hectares. People and individuals can
live long and happy lives even with such high levels of consumption.

5) Overconsumption is the source of our planet's and society's problems. It generates an imbalance on
our world, damages and depletes the earth's life web, and consequently jeopardizes our lives as well
as our well-being.

6) As a result of the limited resources on our world, each person should use 1.8 global hectares annually.
This might be the criterion used to assess whether there are sufficient resources for everyone on our
world to consume.

7) Anticipation and happiness were the two characteristics of a high-quality existence. These decide
whether we can have a sense of contentment and quality of life despite having a sufficient amount
of resources to consume.

8)
9)

10) Climate change would be a calamity, stopping humans from depleting our natural resources too
quickly. We can't disregard the truth about nature's rules. Nature will find a way to protect itself
from our destruction. As a result, we must always be conscious of the implications of our actions if
we do not all wake up and willingly lessen our consumption.

11) Dr. Jason Hickel encourages and advises all people, especially those who board highly developed
countries, to de-develop or "catch up" in order for less developed countries to keep up with the world's
rapid growth and changes.

12) When it comes to the concept of de-development, I believe there will be mixed reactions from different
sections of the world. People who live in wealthy, developed countries would find it difficult to
embrace such a transformation and manner of fostering development and advancement. On the other
hand, it may be advantageous for those in less fortunate countries to implement such a strategy that
is anchored with a development goal. Despite such disagreements, I continue to believe that with
enough information disseminated to enable people to better understand the benefits of de-
development to all or any people, our world, and particularly our environment, we can still find
reasons to live by and accept the concept of de-development. Even if we cut and lessen our
consumption, we may still improve and integrate quality into our lives.

Let’s Analyze

I. The "de-developing framework" aims to move the focus of development away from economics
and toward life and pleasure. We must shift our growth and consumption paradigms to one
of "de-development," because development should be about people's happiness, not GDP
growth. Even without a GDP per capita of 50,000 US-Dollars, a number of developing
countries rank highly on measures of overall pleasure and wellbeing. It means even if the
value of economic activity in those developing countries is low, they can be deemed to be
developing due to high levels of general pleasure and wellbeing. To rescue the globe, we must
downsize the economy, because if we continue to eat away at the living planet while
threatening our security and prosperity, and thus our species' future viability, we will be the
ones to suffer in the end.

II. Because people feel that poverty will result, the terms de-development, de-growth, and nil
growth appear to be irreconcilable with the same old paradigm of human progress. It looks to
be objectionable since it goes against human tradition when it comes to progress. On the other
hand, de-growth is completely compatible with sophisticated human development. It is
entirely possible for us to reduce our resource use while increasing happiness, well-being,
education, health, and longevity, all of which are profoundly important to humans. They
don't believe it will have any impact on future growth. Degrowth activists, on the other
hand, advocate for the compression of economies by downscaling creation and use, saying
that excessive consumption is at the root of long-term ecological problems and social inequity.
Degrowth is based on the idea that lowering consumption does not need individual
martyrdom or a wealth reduction.

III. We have been consumed by the concept of expansion as a result of the different advancements
we have today. These changes have occurred as a result of our continuing consumption of the
planet's resources. When we enframe anything and regard it as a tool to assist us reach a
specific objective, we tend to overlook its essence. We have a predisposition to overconsume
our resources in order to attain growth in this scenario. This notion embodies our belief that
progress and growth are inextricably intertwined. However, we are completely unaware of
the negative effects of this expansion.

IV. We must begin to change and rethink our habits in order to better our lives while reducing
consumption. The majority of people who are successful at saving money and spending wisely
use a long-term perspective, foregoing immediate gratification in order to save for consumer
durables that will give future benefits. Encouraging those who know how to save a lot of
 money and those who don't to take a long-term approach to our well-being is the key to
enhancing the lives of our great-grandkids, as well as everyone's lives, including the lives of
other species. There are many things that can provide us enjoyment while also improving our
lives without compromising the riches we now have. It must begin with us, by realigning our
priorities and understanding that worldly possessions do not always equate to happiness.

V. Both Heidegger's The Question Concerning Technology and Hickel's piece deal with people's
reliance on the objects around them. The difference is that individuals grow passionate about
technology in Heidegger's article. Humans get enslaved by technology after becoming lost and
consumed by it. Heidegger raises concerns about technology and its effects on society. Hickel's
article, on the other side, discusses how humans overconsume Earth's resources because it is
their concept of growth. As human existence expands, the result is a gradual depletion of the
resources we already have. If this trend continues, we will be the ones to bear the
repercussions, which is why its usage must be halted. Both articles, on the other hand, try to
teach individuals about how they should live and how influential their actions are now and
in the future.