Why humanities?

Like anyone who graduated in English Language and Literature decades ago, I read of the growth of STEM and the fading of English and history courses with alarm. Apparently now I am not alone, according the this Saturday’s Globe and Mail, This decline now has an economic cost. Imagine - people have no sense of history, philosophy and literature can’t communicate and art good at the art of the deal. The article tells me that people can’t apply ethical frameworks to machine learning, biotechnology or nanomedicine. I’ll have to look that last one up.

Business leaders are starting to get worried that their workforce doesn’t have a broad understanding of the world. I have every respect for one of the people cited in the article because I met his parents some years ago when they were generous donors to a professional choir and actually enjoyed what they performed. And know he follows their example by attending and supporting the symphony, so he may be not be the best example of the writer’s point in the article.

Learning judgment - weighing evidence. How have we learned these things? Maybe through being read stories at a very early age, and later as children, young adults and throughout the rest of our lives by reading novels, poems, essays, drama, history and philosophy and even theology perhaps. When we don’t have these, the article writer says, we become poorer, “not just culturally but economically”. - oh so that’s the thing - he thinks the arts are really just equipping us to make more money for ourselves after all.

The article does appear in the business section. But isn’t being poor economically but rich culturally a choice that we might want to consider even there? I’ve been the beneficiary of my father’s business career and he went from starting as the thirteenth employee of a mid-sized Canadian insurance company to completing his working life there as the chairman of the board. In his retirement, he finally had the chance to play the piano every day and he painted well enough to have one of his works in the local art gallery - but he did these things all along. He didn’t have the benefit of my liberal arts education, having to go straight to work to support his widowed mother in the depression. Surely the benefit of the liberal arts isn’t to make us become more competitive and make more money. Let’s get real. Studying the humanities is an opportunity to become more human and stand in awe of all the world’s splendor and all its pain.

A worthy successor to St. Francis

“If we consider that emissions per individual in the United States are about two times greater than those of individuals living in China, and about seven times greater than the average of the poorest countries, we can state that a broad change in the irresponsible lifestyle connected with the Western model would have a significant long-term impact.”

Pope Francis Laudate Deum 2023.

Undiplomatic

António Guterres came to the job as Secretary of the United Nations after, among other things, serving as the Prime Minister of Portugal. Usually such leaders learn to be diplomatic. As Bill McKibben observes, he abandons when it comes to talking to fossil fuel providers on climate change. Here are some examples:

“We must end the merciless, relentless, senseless war on nature.” He adds

• We need disruption to end the destruction.

• No more baby steps.

• No more excuses.

• No more greenwashing.

• No more bottomless greed of the fossil fuel industry and its enablers.

• Your core product is our core problems.

Among his fellow straight talkers are Pope Francis Al Gore and McKibbon himself. But my local daily newspapers didn’t join them this weekend. There were marches all over the world, including Toronto asking for the end of fossil fuels. The morning news today contained nary a story nor a photo in print or on screen. Our own party leaders seem not to be undiplomatic - but silent. It’s small wonder that the young roll their eyes at us,

Report Card

The Parish Agreement 2015 was the best one to date on climate change. I still remember the enthusiasm of one person I know on his return from the COP Conference compared to previous ones he attended. There is a great story in the book, Not Too Late called “How the Ants Moved the Elephants in Paris”.

The Climate Vulnerable Form was formed in 2009 and composed of the countries who stand to lose the most from climate change. While rich countries wanted global warming limited to 2 degrees centigrade, in the long term, it meant that the vulnerable would still lose their right to food, health, shelter, and water. They asked for an increase of 1.5 degrees. Everyone would have to work on carbon reduction - and the largest countries would have to work better and faster. One hundred countries had supported them, but the recommendation hadn’t made it into the proposed final goal.

The CVF broke into action - having the Eiffel Tower light up with the the goal “1.5C” and a statement read into the record, which ended , “The parties which stand in the way of recommending a sound decision base on the information available will be remembered by the children of today for the failure of Paris, and we will shout it to the rooftops.” Eventually even Saudi Arabia chimed in and agreed.

It is now 2023 and heading into the next COP conference soon. The most recent report commends what has been done. We can take a minute to rejoice that the rise of greenhouse gases as slowed. In 2015, we were then on track for a rise of 4C degrees if we did nothing. Then we have to face that it is not enough. By 2100, we had reduced the pace to 3 degrees Celsius. Many countries have made promises - largely still on paper. If these are followed through, the predictions are a rise of 2-2.4C by 2100. That takes us back to the fears of the CVF as the real scenario.

The Climate Action Tracker has been created to measure our progress. SCroll down on the tracker to find out progress. Here are Canada’s for the year 2050:

• Our policies and action: Highly insufficient. We’re contributing to a future 4 dgree world

• Our target: almost sufficient for a 2 degree world

• Our target against taking our fair share - insufficient for a less than 3 degree world

• Financing climate change - Highly insufficent.

  Our overall score: Highly insufficient.

  Get angry if you like. But act. Elect people who support the right policies and get the right people on the bus. Keep the wrong people off it. This applies anywhere you have a say - with government, with corporations, in communities and community groups. We have voices. We need to raise them.

Portraits

Yesterday I went to the funeral of a distinguished Canadian whose life was celebrated in an historical cathedral. He was a former primate of the Anglican Church of Canada (in the US called a Presiding Bishop in the American Episcopal Church). Among those attending were two of his successors in that role, the national indigenous bishop, other archbishops, bishops and clergy, and a great many family and friends. I knew Michael when I was an undergraduate student studying English literature and he was finishing a degree in theology at the University of Toronto in the late 1950s. Some years later I was a guest at his wedding in Ottawa. Earlier he had trained as a translator and decades later as primate, he was able to address a Russian Orthodox assembly in Moscow, delighting them by speaking to them in their own language.

His family members spoke of a loving father; one of his associates remembers a wise and thoughtful leader and one of his successors, a man who befriended a small and isolated national church in Cuba. Beneath the record of achievements, not the least of which was an early public apology to Canada’s First Nations of our treatment of their people in residential schools - was the underlying sadness of the last five years of Michael’s life with Alzeheime’s disease and the strength of the daily and loving support of his wife, family members and friends.

On the service leaflet is a picture of Michael in his prime. He once joked about a letter confusing primates of the human kind with those of animal kin - but you would never confuse this image with an intelligent, thoughtful and welcoming gaze, as he poses dressed in the robes of his office. I guess it is a form of mugshot. Later in the day we saw another. It’s one that the poser - pun intended this time - is said to be trying to look powerful and menacingly toughly and defiant. It’s an image of the grade school bully that masks other feelings and realities, not the least of which is fear. How will his followers interpret it? So many currently see and fear power that they see behind it and bow or kowtow to that. How scared are Americans when they are are told he is a stand-in for them as victims? A couple of supporters outside the jail expressed how much they love him? But is this a face that loves back? Will it be the one on a funeral leaflet some day?