Humanities Murder-Suicide

What are the contributing factors to humanities potential virtual murder of Earth + suicide of our species?

As we contribute more and more to causing climate change, it seems like there must be a flaw in our psychology, to continue doing this knowingly. Some aspects of typical human psychology, which seem to be a cause, would be;
Lack of Urgency + Selfishness + Lack of sense of Contribution + Lack of Responsibility

Lack of urgency is largely due to the mentality that a problem is only important, if it affects the individual directly, immediately, and distinctly. I explain this in more detail  in “Authority of Priority”, but basically, since humans so often use our subconscious to prioritize our actions, we are only concerned with short term goals and problems, which are affecting us directly and at the present time. Since subconscious thought only utilizes reference of simpler memories, it doesn't make consecutive connections of concepts, such as chains of cause and effect which are relevant to the future, or consequences which are an indirect result of actions.
With Climate Change involving quite a few connections of cause and effect, being relevant for the further-than-immediate future, and being an indirect consequence, subconscious priority of action isn't even capable of recognizing it, besides comprehending its relevance and priority.

Selfishness is similarly often caused by use of subconscious and instinctual influence (as further analysed, by comparison to conscious thought, in “Colossal Collateral”). It is instinct to be selfish, for self survival, and simple subconscious influence uses these instincts as its main reference. Since reinforcement of actions is caused by instinctual triggers, it is default for humans to only be concerned with problems affecting themselves, and focus on gaining more and more resources, possessions, and benefits for themselves.
With selfishness being a main cause of action, consequences which have a negative effect on the environment are not registered as important, therein causing common disregardful contribution toward the causes of climate change.

Contribution is another more complex connection of concepts, which is not recognized, considered, or acknowledged as much as is necessary to avoid climate change. I explained more about the relevance of contribution in itself in; “Components of Contribution” and “Concept of Contribution”. As contributions can be positive toward causing a benefit, or negative toward causing  problem, both attributes of contribution come into play with helping to prevent climate change, or adding to the cause of it. Besides contribution being too complicated of a concept for us to regularly prioritize, it can also give the impression of insignificance, because of the ratio of small portion caused by an individual, to large impact caused by many. With an individual's contribution seeming minimal and irrelevant, also comes a lack of the sense of responsibility.

When responsibility is ambiguous, this can cause no preventative action to be taken. If nobody specifically is appointed responsible for a problem, then all contributing parties to that problem will often consider it unimportant to reduce their negative contribution, or to take preventative action toward solving the problem. As it is more instinctual to be selfish, when there is a sense of a lack of expecting perception from others (ie responsibility), then the larger problem no longer seems relevant or of priority. Perception from others, is the key in “Anonymity or Responsibility” (as outlined there), and often a motivator to take action, in order to appear better under observation from others. With a lack of that other-observation, comes a lack of regard for negative effects, that an individual causes, which do not directly impact themselves.

As no individuals feel directly responsible for causing or preventing climate change, and everyone often feels anonymous, this allows the continuation of its causes, and a general lack of action toward solution implementation.

With a problem which is;
long-term + indirect + globally affected + globally caused,

comes slack in reduction of the cause. The reason for the continued cause of this global problem, can be linked to these 4 concepts relative to human psychology;

Urgency + Selfishness + Contribution + Responsibility.

But if these concepts can be understood, then perhaps such global problems can be considered more of a priority, important, and universally relevant. With common comprehension, can come a cooperative solution.

Anonymity or Responsibility

How do we act when we can remain anonymous?

How does upfront responsibility influence our actions?

Anonymity and responsibility have a common factor. They are both relative to the perception of others. Anonymity is the lack of perception of others toward an individual's identity, meaning any actions taken by that someone, will not be perceived by others to have been performed by their identity which is known in other circumstances.
Responsibility is the direct known perception of others for a specified task. It’s kind of the opposite of being anonymous, as the individuals identity in relation to their actions, will be directly perceived by others.

Just when someone knows they have a responsibility, how someone acts when they believe their identity is anonymous, compared to when their identity is known, depends on the individual's values for motivation.

In 1 case, the person values more highly, themselves, and their status and identity as perceived by others. In this case, being anonymous makes a big difference. There prospect of how others perceive them, is removed. As this prospect is regularly a high value and priority, which normally directs their actions, now that status is removed, alternate motivations will take its place. Considering someone who normally takes high value in their own image (as perceived by others), it is likely that their core values prioritize themselves in general (otherwise their perceived status likely wouldn’t be very relevant to them). If their core values are focused on themselves, then in a situation where perception from others is removed, their highest motivating factor is left to be simply benefiting themselves. This would make their actions more self centered and selfish, compared to when they are not anonymous. When they are aware that others are perceiving their actions, they will take actions which are perceived to be better, which will often include benefiting others, or the environment in general.

In another case, the person values more highly, others, and the most effective and efficient contribution towards the overall sum. In this case, being anonymous should make little to no difference. Since their priority motivation is regardless of the perception of others, their motivating value would be unchanged with a lack of perception from others, of their actions. Their main motivator for action would still be to benefit others, including if their values are to make the most effective beneficial contribution to the overall total (of which their action affects).

For eg, someone who values status of perception of others, might donate $2 towards a sick kids charity, if the cashier asks them directly, and their friend is standing next to them. This is because they value how their friend and the cashier perceive them. But, if that same person was online, and an ad popped up asking them to donate $2 toward that same charity, they would choose not to donate. Since they can remain anonymous online, and nobody will know that they turned it down, other-perception is now removed, so that their highest value is benefiting themselves, which means keeping that $2.

On the other hand, someone who values the greater good, might refrain from throwing a plastic bottle in the trash, to recycle later, while their friends are with them and perceiving their actions. But, they would still make the same effort to carry a plastic bottle home to recycle, even in the circumstance of nobody watching their actions. The motivating factor is to reduce pollution and reduce resource + energy waste, as the overall most efficient contribution to the sum of that which is affected by that action. This value does not change with perception from others, or lack thereof.

Similarly, when responsibility is applicated to an individual who values themselves, they will take different actions in the circumstance of knowing others are perceiving their task of responsibility, compared to when nobody is watching them for a task, and they will focus on benefiting themselves. An individual who values overall efficiency, would likely take the same actions when labelled with responsible for a task, or alternatively having no obligation perceived by others.

If we want the total sum of the environment we live in + its inhabitants, to be the most effective, efficient, fair and beneficial, therefore making an improvement for the average individual and the overall, then perhaps values of the contributing individuals within that environment, should be re-analysed, and re-evaluated and re-adjusted. If the contributing individuals values can be readjusted to focus on the benefit of the total sum of components in an environment, rather than the benefit of the single self portion, then it would be an overall improvement.

Addiction Affliction

What causes addiction?

How can it be altered?

Considering addiction to be; repeating an action, despite knowledgeable intention. In other words, a compulsion to take an action, which can not be controlled by conscious aware choice.

So addiction is basically something your mind has learned to crave so much, that you no longer have the ability to overpower the part of your mind which wants to take that action (potentially including, using a substance).

Since it is a part of the mind which counteracts consciously aware choice, it must be subconscious. The act of continuing to take part in the addiction is the effect of subconscious influence, since its without your conscious intention. As long as the addiction has developed through experiences (rather than born with it), it would likely have been caused by subconscious influence as well (unless you were knowingly and intentionally causing the attraction toward the addictive action).

Considering subconscious influence to be; the urge (regardless of awareness) to either repeat or avoid a similar circumstances to a past situation where the mind received either positive or negative reinforcement. This would basically explain how addictions develop. When someone receives significant positive reinforcement to repeat certain circumstances, this would be the cause for addiction. The person may be consciously aware of thee positive reinforcement as it happens, but in the case of addiction, they would likely not be aware of the gradual increase of overpowering influence to repeat the circumstances. Once the reinforcement to repeat, is so strong that is causes the person to repeat the situation, despite conscious awareness that it is more beneficial not to repeat, then it is an addiction.

The positive reinforcement to repeat, is likely instinctual feedback triggers which would be beneficial to the individual in a survival lifestyle with scarce resources. Instinctually, reinforcing someone to repeat eating sugar, makes sense for survival, when sugar and food is scarce. Artificially manufactured drugs, which would not be available in a natural survivalist lifestyle, usually cause a trigger of significant positive reinforcement, by inducing chemicals in the brain, which would regularly be triggered less significantly for alternate positive circumstances. This of course makes drugs a common source for addiction, with a profound positive reinforcement by the brain.

Just as positive reinforcement causes addiction, negative reinforcement causes avoidance. At the opposite end of the spectrum, significant negative reinforcement is basically what we call trauma. Smaller degrees of negative reinforcement usually beneficially cause us to avoid harmful scenarios (though also, mainly for an environment of scarce resources). So if an addiction is causing significant harm, negative reinforcement from harm can counteract the positive drive to repeat. This could cause someone to stop an addiction naturally, but it could also be used to counteract an addiction consciously.

Using conscious conditioning, someone can repeatedly, intentionally focus on negative aspects of an addiction. Focusing on the negative effects, during times of taking action in the addiction or thinking about it, they can cause more significant negative reinforcement associated with the action or substance of addiction. If this is done enough that the negative reinforcement outweighs the positive for that addiction, the person should then subconsciously be influenced to avoid the addiction. Besides focusing on the negative aspects of the addiction, they can also focus on positive aspects of avoiding the addiction. This can cause positive reinforcement toward being successful in avoidance. The person can focus on the benefits to physical health or improved lifestyle, causing positive reinforcement for the situation of making the choice to avoid the addiction, or whatever situation is involved, when the addiction is avoided.

The triggers of addiction may be instinctual, and the development and influence of addiction may be subconscious, but ultimately the most powerful aspect of the mind, can be conscious control.