IN CONTEXT #44, Summer 1996
© 1996 by Context Institute

From Scott London:

Robert, I would like to respond to your futures survey. First let me tell you how much I value your work. I'm sad that In Context is no longer in print, I used to read it very closely. But hopefully it will now flourish online instead.

I have given some thought to the four scenarios you describe. I believe that each one is likely. In fact, I think we see movements that confirm that all four scenarios are already being played out. I don't believe that they are mutually exclusive. There are pockets of society that are deeply rooted in the status quo and will continue along the "more of the same" track until there is some form of catastrophe and breakdown. There are other pockets, even whole cultures, dedicated to the third scenario (I lived for some 15 years in Sweden which is a typical example of this approach). I also feel there is much evidence of a transformation of consciousness taking place around the world today.

What's odd is how easily people operating within these different frameworks can coexist despite their different outlooks and convictions. Look at the scientific community -- I think it exemplifies all the scenarios you describe. Some scientists are deeply wedded to the status quo and see no cause for doing things differently in the future. Others recognize impending breakdown and are deeply concerned about it (have you seen the book "The End of Science"?). Still others realize that we have to marshal all the scientific expertise and knowledge we can in the name of survival. A small minority of scientists realize that science has long been part of the problem, not the solution, and are calling for a change in consciousness. As one scientist I know puts it, we need to adopt new metaphors in science; we need to replace the notion that the universe is built like a clockwork mechanism to one that sees nature as a vibrant, self-organizing living system.

I don't know how to rate the likelihood of the four scenarios you describe. I think they overlap and affect each other. For example, scenario four is often directly linked with scenario two -- crisis prompts expanded consciousness. In Sweden, I learned that the jump from scenario one to scenario three is not always so great -- some of the most socially progressive and innovative policies and technologies can emerge from within a status quo environment. Even so, scenario three is unlikely without the shift of consciousness you describe in scenario four.

So these things are not easily separated out. But, to give you something to work with, I will give it a try:

More of the same: 4
(It is unlikely. Something has to give.)

Disaster and collapse: 9
(I think the coming years will see the breakdown of many unsustainable social systems)

Eco-tech triumph: 5
(I wish I could be more optimistic here, but things seem to move so slowly on this front that it will probably take much more than 20 years)

Transformation of consciousness: 8
(There is a groundswell of profound change taking place, and I think the evidence is all around us, if you look in the right places)

I hope these thoughts are useful. I look forward to seeing what others have to say about this subject. Thanks again for the fine work you are doing.

With best wishes, Scott.

Scott London * london@rain.org

http://www.west.net/~insight/london