Ecology is progress. what about humility to face climate change

### Humility and Progress: How Professional Training Shapes Our Attitudes Toward Nature

In an age where climate change, biodiversity loss, and ecological degradation demand urgent action, the way we approach and relate to nature has never been more critical. Yet, the attitudes that professionals from different fields bring to these global challenges can vary dramatically.

Economics, engineering, and ecology all shape how we understand and interact with nature, but they do so in very different ways. As a result, professionals in these disciplines tend to exhibit distinct attitudes, particularly when it comes to humility—a quality essential for sustainable progress. Could this be a “professional deformation,” where specific fields cultivate behaviors like confidence or dominance that limit a more humble approach to our ecosystems? And if so, what are the sociological, philosophical, and educational structures that underpin these tendencies?

### 1. Economics: Confidence in Abstraction and Growth

In economics, the goal is often to model, predict, and influence human systems—particularly markets. This approach is inherently anthropocentric, focused on maximizing growth, efficiency, and managing human behavior. The use of abstract models, based on simplifying complex systems into measurable outputs like GDP, can distance economists from the real-world complexities of nature and ecosystems.

This tendency toward abstraction leads to a sense of control over human and environmental systems, which can reduce the sense of humility. Economics professionals are trained to see markets as predictable systems that can be manipulated, which might foster a confidence that overlooks the unpredictable, non-linear nature of ecosystems.

Moreover, the communication styles in economics, especially in business schools, emphasize self-promotion, authority, and policy influence. Success is often tied to how well one can articulate a model’s potential for growth and human welfare, often sidelining nature’s limits or complexity.

### 2. Engineering: Mastery Over Materials and Systems

In engineering, the focus is on problem-solving—specifically, the ability to master physical systems and create solutions for human needs. Engineers are taught to innovate, build, and perfect, often with the underlying belief that human ingenuity can solve any problem, even those related to environmental challenges.

This attitude can lead to a sense of mastery over nature, especially as engineers design systems meant to control or modify natural resources, like water management, energy infrastructure, or agricultural technology. The professional culture within engineering tends to reward innovation and efficiency, reinforcing an image of competence and even superiority over the natural world.

However, in this pursuit of mastery, there is often a lack of humility in acknowledging the unintended consequences of technological interventions. Technological solutions, when applied without an ecological lens, can degrade ecosystems or disrupt natural processes. The focus on innovation sometimes overshadows the need for caution and respect for nature’s inherent complexity.

### 3. Ecology: Respect for Complexity and Interdependence

In contrast, ecology and environmental sciences inherently teach humility. Ecologists work within complex systems where interdependencies, feedback loops, and natural limits are core concepts. Unlike the human-centric focus of economics or the technocentric view in engineering, ecology demands an understanding that human beings are part of a larger ecosystem, not above it.

The unpredictability of ecosystems fosters a culture of humility because it is clear that nature cannot be fully controlled or predicted. Ecologists are trained to recognize the limits of human intervention and to approach environmental issues with caution, patience, and respect for nature’s ability to regenerate.

In environmental fields, collaboration across disciplines, stakeholders, and ecosystems is more common, encouraging shared responsibility and collective humility. The ecological worldview places humans within the larger web of life, emphasizing coexistence rather than domination.

### 4. Sociological Insights: The Role of Professional Culture and Identity

From a sociological perspective, the differences in how humility is expressed across these disciplines are influenced by professional identity, educational structures, and social capital. French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu emphasized how professional fields cultivate distinct habitus—a set of behaviors, attitudes, and values that professionals internalize.

In economics and engineering, the social capital—that is, the rewards and recognition from peers and society—often comes from demonstrating competence, authority, and the ability to control or predict systems. These fields are also more likely to reward individual achievement and leadership, qualities that may inadvertently discourage humility.

In contrast, ecology and environmental sciences are more likely to value collaborative problem-solving and long-term thinking. The social capital in these fields comes from being seen as a steward or guardian of nature, a position that inherently encourages humility.

### 5. Professional Deformation: Lack of Humility as a Cultural Trait

The tendencies we see in economics and engineering—toward confidence, abstraction, and mastery—can be understood as a form of professional deformation. The very training that equips professionals with technical skills and knowledge can also lead to overconfidence and a diminished sense of humility toward nature.

Educational systems in economics and engineering often prioritize self-promotion, competition, and leadership, further cultivating this sense of authority. In contrast, the study of ecology involves direct interaction with nature, often through fieldwork and collaboration, fostering a deeper appreciation of nature’s complexity and a more humble attitude.

### 6. The Path Forward: Cross-Disciplinary Learning

Addressing the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, and sustainability challenges requires integrating the strengths of each discipline. While economics and engineering can offer important tools for growth and technological innovation, these fields need to embrace more ecological humility.

Educational systems and professional cultures can foster cross-disciplinary learning, encouraging economists and engineers to engage deeply with ecological systems. Similarly, ecologists can benefit from the analytical tools and innovation-driven mindset of their peers in economics and engineering.

Ultimately, humility in the face of nature’s complexity is not a sign of weakness but a recognition of our interdependence with the natural world. By fostering this humility across all disciplines, we can create a more sustainable and respectful relationship with the planet.

---

### References:

- Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County Almanac.

- Naess, A. (1984). Deep Ecology.

- Carson, R. (1962). Silent Spring.

- Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics.

- Daly, H. (2011). Ecological Economics: Principles and Applications.

- Winner, L. (1986). The Whale and the Reactor.

- Florman, S. (1994). The Existential Pleasures of Engineering.

- Pye, D. (1964). The Nature and Aesthetics of Design.

- Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.

- Latour, B. (1991). We Have Never Been Modern.

- Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia.

- Orr, D. (1992). Ecological Literacy: Education and the Transition to a Postmodern World.

---

#