|
A family member is someone whom you personally form a bond with, whom has possibly cared for you, and whom you grow to love. Completely different than the planet. You can love the planet, but it's much easier for someone to feel love for another person. If the planet died, the average person would fear for the lives of their loved ones and themselves, not for the planet itself. It's not like saying "you couldn't care less about a sick family member because you're not directly helping them" at all. Of course people care about the planet, but like I said, it mostly isn't because of the planet itself. Which leads to what you quoted of mine. If it doesn't affect their lives, people tend not to take it too seriously. Global Warming isn't a sick family member whose death will affect their own life. Our lives will be over by the time Global Warming effects are life changing. Try not to use phrases like "not true at all" and "just doesn't make sense" when debating psychological opinions. You don't know how everyone thinks, and neither do I. I only gave my opinion on the subject based on what I've seen in people.
|
They don't love the planet. They love their kids, their friends, their family, their kids' future, the plants, or the animals. People are passionate about global warming without being directly involved in solving it. Not everyone (pretty much no one) is able to dedicate their lives to everything they feel passionate about. I feel passionate about family, animals, cancer, smoking, alcohol consumption, and dozens and dozens of other things. Things I feel
very passionate about. You can't simply dismiss it because I'm not dedicating my entire life to it.
Also, my opinion is that your statement wasn't true at all. You can, and did argue differently, however, I still hold that opinion.
|
With something like this, you have to go out there and give it your all. This is our planet we're talking about. If not, then you don't really care all that much do you? Which is what I'm saying, most people don't.
|
How does that make sense, though? "With something like this" but what does that even mean? There's different levels of passion. Someone can be passionate about the environment but not dedicate their entire life to it because they have other passions. Plus many people know (or believe) that they cannot individually cause a change. That doesn't even mean the typical idea that no one can change the world, but people have responsibilities. It's foolish to say someone doesn't care about something just because they aren't giving it their all towards that cause when they have plenty of responsibilites themselves such as working and supporting a family, raising kids, taking care of elderly parents, working at a school to help teach the kids (which are the future). Everyone contributes in different ways. One person may donate money, another may volunteer, another may become a politician, and another may just voice their stance on social media/the internet in order to attempt to raise awareness and convert people to their beliefs.
|
That example doesn't really fit too well. Having ambitions in life fits with what I said about people dedicating themselves to stop Global Warming. That's ambition.
|
That's assuming that global warming is a more important topic than movies. But that's a personal decision. The example @TWIZ gave was actually accurate. People have different ambitions. People love movies, but they don't make them. People love the environment, but they don't join the EPA. You can't keep acting like everyone is capable of dropping everything and joining some group to directly combat global warming. Everyone has a role. Not everyone is capable of directly getting involved in fighting global warming. Societal pressure does wonders much greater, without expecting every American citizen to join the same role in society, leaving every other role behind.