Hi there, interesting reading. Thanks. However, I would like to propose another angle to reflection. When reading this type of approach (those who've got it right do the right thing, those doing it wrongly have a smaller/wrong understanding - I know you did not write it, but that's what the graph suggests) I get the feeling that it tends to create division more than unity, among those who are aware and a 'legion of those who ignore, or aren't capable of understanding'.
I know this has been extracted from a known paper, but a lot has happened in the almost 30 (!!) years since this paper has been published, and climate debate is far different from what it was. So I'd be a bit careful when stating, in 2023, the reasons appointed by one paper, in 1996, as the factors/causes of something.
Ultimately, a perception I think is left outside of it (it wasn't that big topic 30y ago), that is reinforced by the confrontation sought by the "8 mechanisms (...)" is the social/economic gap. These mechanisms suggest that people start from similar base points but choose to disengage, and it ignores how inequalities affect people's perceptions of realities and their priorities. An again, this approach of pointing out the misbehaviors as the only source of knowledge sounds a bit like a confrontational arrogance. The reflection I propose for us all to make is on how to engage people that are still struggling to make ends meet and to have a decent life. Putting it simply, those excluded from the benefits of globalization (and they are still majority of the world) will choose their basic (and maybe their secondary) necessities before engaging in climate acts.
That justification+ list is fascinating. And I appreciated your preferred structure for emailing people, I'll definitely be using that lol - thank you!
Just coming across this newsletter - I absolutely love digging into the psychology and motivations behind climate change and what we can do to change them for the better, fantastic read. You’ve got a new subscriber in me!
Enjoyed your talk with the Palo Alto CC book club. I'm so glad you're looking into moral disengagement! Not all psychological research is spot on (retired therapist here), but much of it is really valuable, and too often flies under the radar. Even my professional friends can't keep up with all the literature. And also thanks for the bit about how to get people to read emails/say yes. Another great newsletter! Tak, David Page
Thanks Kim, I've only recently discovered your substack and love your approach and style. As a pracademic myself I particularly appreciate your research informed approach. Thanks for the work you're doing! warm regards, Jen de Vries
In response to this great post I have: 1) A quick ask for help (no cost but time) and 2) to wholeheartedly agree that we need to get people moving beyond inaction and break through their moral disengagement. My own effort to do that is to get them emotionally involved, not just intellectually through facts, but by capturing their imagination with climate stories that models action in the fictional plot.
The ask: I have a free newsletter that aims to promote this type of climate fiction and a new book which you can get a free review copy to read. This book doesn’t fit the typical dystopian genre, so it needs word of mouth to get it going. Please sign up and read the book and then tell everyone about it. The book is: The EarthStar Solution-A Climate Fiction Mystery. Go to www.climatestorygarden.com to learn more. And I thank you with all my heart.
Hi there, interesting reading. Thanks. However, I would like to propose another angle to reflection. When reading this type of approach (those who've got it right do the right thing, those doing it wrongly have a smaller/wrong understanding - I know you did not write it, but that's what the graph suggests) I get the feeling that it tends to create division more than unity, among those who are aware and a 'legion of those who ignore, or aren't capable of understanding'.
I know this has been extracted from a known paper, but a lot has happened in the almost 30 (!!) years since this paper has been published, and climate debate is far different from what it was. So I'd be a bit careful when stating, in 2023, the reasons appointed by one paper, in 1996, as the factors/causes of something.
Ultimately, a perception I think is left outside of it (it wasn't that big topic 30y ago), that is reinforced by the confrontation sought by the "8 mechanisms (...)" is the social/economic gap. These mechanisms suggest that people start from similar base points but choose to disengage, and it ignores how inequalities affect people's perceptions of realities and their priorities. An again, this approach of pointing out the misbehaviors as the only source of knowledge sounds a bit like a confrontational arrogance. The reflection I propose for us all to make is on how to engage people that are still struggling to make ends meet and to have a decent life. Putting it simply, those excluded from the benefits of globalization (and they are still majority of the world) will choose their basic (and maybe their secondary) necessities before engaging in climate acts.
That justification+ list is fascinating. And I appreciated your preferred structure for emailing people, I'll definitely be using that lol - thank you!
Just coming across this newsletter - I absolutely love digging into the psychology and motivations behind climate change and what we can do to change them for the better, fantastic read. You’ve got a new subscriber in me!
Kimberly! Very important issues for us in any Climate movement.
This reminds me a little of the work of George Lakoff on framing. See especially "The All New Don't Think of an Elephant" Excerpted at
https://lnkd.in/gcZaKEce
https://framelab.substack.com/
Enjoyed your talk with the Palo Alto CC book club. I'm so glad you're looking into moral disengagement! Not all psychological research is spot on (retired therapist here), but much of it is really valuable, and too often flies under the radar. Even my professional friends can't keep up with all the literature. And also thanks for the bit about how to get people to read emails/say yes. Another great newsletter! Tak, David Page
Thanks Kim, I've only recently discovered your substack and love your approach and style. As a pracademic myself I particularly appreciate your research informed approach. Thanks for the work you're doing! warm regards, Jen de Vries
In response to this great post I have: 1) A quick ask for help (no cost but time) and 2) to wholeheartedly agree that we need to get people moving beyond inaction and break through their moral disengagement. My own effort to do that is to get them emotionally involved, not just intellectually through facts, but by capturing their imagination with climate stories that models action in the fictional plot.
The ask: I have a free newsletter that aims to promote this type of climate fiction and a new book which you can get a free review copy to read. This book doesn’t fit the typical dystopian genre, so it needs word of mouth to get it going. Please sign up and read the book and then tell everyone about it. The book is: The EarthStar Solution-A Climate Fiction Mystery. Go to www.climatestorygarden.com to learn more. And I thank you with all my heart.