HUMAN FLOURISHING AND DE-
20) a day has increased
DEVELOPMENT
Thoughts to Ponder
o Dr. Jason Hickel is an economic
anthropologist, author, and a Fellow of
the Royal Society of Arts. He is
Professor at the Institute for
Environmental Science and Technology
at the Autonomous University of
Barcelona, Visiting Senior Fellow at the
International Inequalities Institute at the
London School of Economics, and Chair
Professor of Global Justice and the
Environment at the University of Oslo.
o He is Associate Editor of the journal
World Development, and serves on the
Climate and Macroeconomics
Roundtable of the National Academy of
Sciences, the Statistical Advisory Panel
for the UN Human Development Report,
the advisory board of the Green New
Deal for Europe, the Harvard-Lancet
Commission on Reparations and
Redistributive Justice, and the Lancet
Commission on Sustainable Health.
Forget ‘Developing’ Poor Countries, It’s Time to
‘De-Develop’ Rich Countries
o This week, heads of state are gathering
in New York to sign the UN's new
sustainable development goals (SDGs).
The main objective is to eradicate
poverty by 2030. Beyoncé, One
Direction and Malala are on board. It's
set to be a monumental international
celebration. Given all the fanfare, one
might think the SDGs are about to offer
a fresh plan for how to save the world,
but beneath all the hype, its business as
usual. The main strategy for eradicating
poverty is the same: growth. Growth has
been the main object of development for
the past 70 years, despite the fact that it's
not working. Since 1980, the global
economy has grown by 380%, but the
number of people living in poverty on
less than $5 (£3.
by more than 1.1 billion. That's 17 times
the population of Britain. So much for
the trickle-down effect.
o Orthodox economists insist that all we
need is yet more growth. More
progressive types tell us that we need to
shift some of the yields of growth from
the richer segments of the population to
the poorer ones, evening things out a bit.
Neither approach is adequate. Why?
Because even at current levels of average
global consumption, we're overshooting
our planet's bio capacity by more than
50% each year. In other words, growth
isn't an option any more-we've already
grown too much. Scientists are now
telling us that we're blowing past
planetary boundaries at breakneck speed.
And the hard truth is that this global
crisis is due almost entirely to over
consumption in rich countries.
o Right now, our planet only has enough
resources for each of us to consume 1.8
“global hectares" annually-a
standardized unit that measures resource
use and waste. This figure is roughly
what the average person in Ghana or
Guatemala consumes. By contrast,
people in the US and Canada consumes
about 8 hectares per person, while
Europeans consume 4.7 hectares-many
times their fair share. What does this
mean for our theory of development?
Economist Peter Edward argues that
instead of pushing poorer countries to
“catch up" with rich ones, we should be
thinking of ways to get rich countries to
“catch down" to more appropriate leveIs
of development. We should look at
societies where people live long and
happy lives at relatively low levels of
income and consumption not as basket
cases that need to be developed towards
western models, but as exemplars of
efficient living.
o How much do we really need to live long
and happy lives? In the US, life
 expectancy is 79 years and GDP per
capita is $53,000.But many countries
have achieved similar life expectancy
with a mere fraction of this income.
Cuba has a comparable life expectancy
to the US and one of the highest literacy
rates in the world with GDP per capita of
only $6,000 and consumption of only 1.9
hectares - right at the threshold of
ecological sustainability. Similar claims
can be made of Peru, Ecuador,
Honduras, Nicaragua and Tunisia. Yes,
some of the excess income and
consumption we see in the rich world
yield improvements in quality of life that
are not captured by life expectancy, or
even literacy rates. But even if we look
at measures of overall happiness and
wellbeing in addition to life expectancy,
a number of low- and middle-income
countries rank highly. Costa Rica
manages to sustain one of the highest
happiness indicators and life
expectancies in the world with a per
capita income one-fourth that of the US.
In light of this, perhaps we should regard
such countries not as underdeveloped,
but rather as appropriately developed.
And maybe we need to start calling on
rich countries to justify their excesses.
o Negative formulations won't get us
anywhere. The idea of "steady-state"
economics is a step in the right direction
and is growing in popularity, but it still
doesn't get the framing right. We need to
reorient ourselves toward a positive
future, a truer form of progress. One that
is geared toward quality instead of
quantity. One that is more sophisticated
than just accumulating ever increasing
amounts of stuff, which doesn't make
anyone happier anyway. What is certain
is that GDP as a measure is not going to
get us there and we need to get rid of it.
Perhaps we might take a cue from Latin
Americans, who are organizing
alternative visions around the indigenous
concept of buen vivir, or good living.
The west has its own tradition of
reflection on the good life and it's time
we revive it. Robert and Edward
Skidelsky take us down this road in his
book, "How Much is Enough?",where
they lay out the possibility of
interventions such as banning
advertising, a shorter working week and
a basic income, all of which would
improve our lives while reducing
consumption.
o Either we slow down voluntarily or
climate change will do it for us. We can't
go on ignoring the laws of nature. But
rethinking our theory of progress is not
only an ecological imperative; it is also a
development one. If we do not act soon,
all our hard-won gains against poverty
will evaporate, as food systems collapse
and mass famine re-emerges to an extent
not seen since the 19th century. This is
not about giving anything up. And it's
certainly not about living a life of
voluntary misery or imposing harsh
limits on human potential. On the
contrary, it's about reaching a higher
level of understanding and consciousness
about what we're doing here and why.
THE GOOD LIFE
Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics and Good Life
THE MAGICIAN'S TWIN: C.S. LEWIS AND
THE CASE AGAINST SCIENTISM
o C.S Lewis posited "Science must be
guided by some ethical basis that is not
dictated by science itself."
EUDAIMONIA: THE ULTIMATE GOOD
o Eudaimonia or Happiness – It is
achieved only through a rationally
directed life.
EUDAIMONIA: UNIQUELY HUMAN unjust power relations which are often at
the ehart of development problems. It
o Eudaimonia is what defines as the good puts the international human rights
life; is only possible by living a life entitlements and claims of the people
virtue. (the 'right-holders') and the
corresponding obligations of the state
Aristotle’s Tripartite Soul
(the 'duty bearer') in the center of the
Humans (Rational) – Theoretical Practical national development debate, and it
clarifies the purpose of capacity
Animals (Partly Rational) – Sensitive; development."
Locomotion Perception
DOCUMENTS PRINCIPLES
Plants (Non-rational) – Nutritive; Growth, This document affirms
Nutrition, and Reproduction everyone’s right to
participate in and benefit
Arete and Human Happiness Universal Declaration from scientific misuses. The
of Human Rights right to the benefits of
(Article 27) science comes under the
Arete – Excellence of any kind; moral virtue domain of ‘culture,’ so it is
usually examined from a
Two types of virtue: cultural rights perspective.
This document affirms that
1. Intellectual Virtue – Virtue of Thought all advances in scientific and
2. Moral Virtue – Virtue of Character technological knowledge
should solely be geared
Some key moral virtue UNESCO towards the welfare of the
Recommendation on global citizen, and calls upon
Generosity – Repeatedly being unselfish the Status of member states to develop
Scientific necessary protocols and
Researchers – 1974 policies to monitor and
Temperance – Repeatedly resisting and (Article 4) secure this objective.
foregoing Countries are asked to show
that science and technology
Courage – Repeatedly exhibiting proper action are integrated into policies
and emotional response that aim to ensure a more
humane and just society.
When Technology and Humanity Cross UNESCO This documents states,
Declaration on the “Today, more than ever,
Use of Scientific science and its applications
Human rights in the face of scientific and
Knowledge – 1999 are indispensable for
technological advancement are critical factors in (Article 33) development. All levels of
one's journey toward eudaimonia or the good government and the private
life. sector should provide
enhanced support for
S. Romi Mukherjee building up an adequate and
evenly distributed scientific
and technological capacity
o "[It] seeks to place concern for human through appropriate
rights at the heart of how the education and research
international community engages with programmed as an
urgent global challenges. The UN indispensable foundation for
economic, social, cultural,
Development Programmed characterizes and environmentally sound
this approach as one that 'leads to better development. This is
and more sustainable outcomes by particularly urgent for
analyzing and addressing the developing countries.” This
declaration encompass issues
inequalities, discriminatory practices and such as pollution –free
 production, efficient resource
use, biodiversity protection,
and brain drains.

WHY THE FUTURE DOES NOT NEED US?

Can you imagine life without human race?

o William Nelson Joy wrote an article

from 2001 "Why the future doesn't need
us?" The 21st-century technologies—
genetics, nanotechnology and robotics
(GNR)—are becoming more powerful
that they can potentially bring about new
classes of accidents, threats, and abuses.
o From a book wrote by Theodore
Kaczynski-Unabomber Manifesto-he
described that the unintended
consequences of the design and the use
of technology are clearly related to
Murphy's Law: Anything that can go
wrong will go wrong.
o The paradox of emerging antibiotic-
resistant strains of dangerous bacteria
such as the introduction of
Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT)
to combat malarial mosquitoes.
o John Seely Broen and Paul Duguid, said
in a n article A Response to Bill Joy and
Doom-and-Gloom Technofuturists—
neo-Luditte, someone who rejects new
technologies and shows technophobic
leanings.