Saturday, February 21, 2026

An Ecological Approach to the “Meaning of Life” Question





The question “What is the meaning of life?” has occupied philosophers throughout history, and continues to do so, tending generally towards a  conclusion that nobody knows.


This conclusion is worrying, because if there is an absence of meaning to life, there is an absence of purpose in our lives, and that will lead to a absence of happiness. Absence of meaning also tends to lead to an absence of value, so that if human life is meaningless, killing human beings might tend to become a trivial offence. Therefore the question ‘what is the meaning of life?” has serious practical relevance.


If we look at the question from a scientific, specifically a biological, angle it helps to resolve the philosophical question, and at the same time provide us with a strong ethic.


We can start by asking: what is the meaning of a biological object - a plant, fungus or animal? Biology finds that the central purpose of each living individual is to reproduce, to contribute to the next generation of its species. The qualities of any mature, healthy living individual will centre around transmission of the genes of that individual’s species. Some more complex life forms will also spend time in nurturing and protecting their offspring until it is mature, and when this task is complete, their individual form will decay and eventually die. 


Therefore, since we humans are animals, we share this universal biological purpose: our meaning, our purpose, at a biological level, is to bring about the existence of the next generation of humans. 


There is plenty of evidence in the arts and humanities to support this claim. A great deal of song celebrates romantic love. Much art and sculpture celebrates the attractive beauty of the human body. Much literature and theatre narrates the adventures involved in creating male-female relationships. 

 

Like other animals, we humans are conscious beings, but unlike other animals with cognition, we have advanced linguistic, cognitive, analytical, imaginative and creative capabilities that give our species capabilities and ecological impacts that go well beyond the impacts of other species.


Reproduction generally leads to an exponential increase in numbers of a successful species until negative feedbacks mean that a state of ecological balance is reached. As a species, negative feedbacks apply to us, not through predation by other species, since we are the apex predator, but by complex physical and biological feedbacks of our own creation.


Here is a summary of the problems we are creating for ourselves, the four horsemen of the modern apocalypse:


  • Our burning of fossil fuels is causing the planet to heat up, which has implications in terms of extreme weather events, food shortages, and migration. 
  • We are killing off our fellow creatures at a rate which, if continued, will mean that the only animals left on the planet will be humans, animals kept for human food and service, and pests that we cannot get rid of like rats and cockroaches.
  • We face problems with sea level rise, soil loss that will eventually lead to food shortages.
  • Most dangerous of all is the real possibility that our leaders will bring about  a global nuclear war that will certainly end our civilisation, and possibly end all advanced life on earth. 

These then are the negative feedbacks that will compromise the ability of our descendants to thrive.


These negative feedbacks affect the biological purpose of our existence. It is still the case that the meaning of our life is to ensure the survival of the next generation of humans, but this meaning has in the present age moved beyond  the simple matter of creating children and nurturing them until they can fend for themselves as the next generation of a stable society. 


Our purpose, the meaning of our lives,  is now a major challenge, that of changing the way our species manages the living planetary environment. We must radically transform the way we humans manage our personal, social and national and international lives and how we relate to the web of life within which we exist, and which supports our life. 


It is imperative that we change the way we use water, obtain our food, provide our shelter, obtain our energy and manage our waste products. We must make these usage processes sustainable, in other words, we must make them capable of being used in the indefinite future. The old linear production model consisting of: extract resources, manufacture, use, and dispose, must give way to a new, circular model consisting of: take from recycled materials, manufacture, use, repair, re-use, recycle. Instead of naively assuming that we can take what we feel we need when we need it, we must apply our reasoning, conscious minds to each and every one of our habits, analysing their ecological impact.


We do possess the intellectual technological and economic capacity necessary to bring this about, but there are two major human behavioural problems to be overcome. 


First, people do not like  change, and especially change to ingrained  habits that is demanded by complex scientific findings. 


The second problem that we face is that our ecological difficulties have been brought about by economic processes that have made the controllers of those processes extremely wealthy. If ecological science demands that we reduce and stop the production of carbon fuels, single use plastics, insecticides and so on, the billionaire manufacturers of those substances take strong action to defend their profits. They are using the media, owned by fellow-billionaires, to question, obfuscate, and deny the science, and delay the actions needed to rescue us from the consequences of their actions. Moreover, they are able to use their almost unlimited quantities of money to recruit to their service populist politicians who can appeal to emotions such as peoples’ sense of exploitation, anger and resentment and channel them towards electing authoritarian leaders who will carry out policies favoured by the oligarchs.


Therefore, no matter how compelling the case may be for understanding that the meaning of human life in the twenty first century has turned from a straightforward matter of sexual reproduction into a matter of global ecological concern, humanity faces a major struggle in fulfilling its true purpose because of mental inertia and the ruling oligarchy.




Richard Lawson MB BS, MRCPsych













Sunday, February 08, 2026

JANUARY 2026 WEATHER IN BRITAIN AND MAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE






Here is a highly simplified 10 point explanation of the extremely grey and wet weather Britain has experienced at the beginning of 2026


1. Earth has a greenhouse effect 

2. Humans have increased the greenhouse effect, mainly by burning coal, oil and gas

3. Earth is therefore warming

4. Arctic air is warming faster than more southerly regions

5. So the temperature difference between Arctic air and more southerly air is reducing

6. This causes the Northern polar jet stream to weaken and become more wavy

7. The southerly waves of jet stream have conveyed a succession of low pressure systems to the UK

8. The air they bring is warmer (see 3 above) and so can carry more water vapour 

9. The pattern in 7 above persists due to a “blocking high” over Scandinavia and Eastern Russia

10. This has resulted in record January rainfall in the UK 17% more than average

Thursday, January 29, 2026

LIVING BRUE DAY, MARCH 28th GLASTONBURY TOWN HALL

Join The Living Brue Group for an inspiring full day focussing on the River Brue on 28th March 2026, at Glastonbury Town Hall. 

 

This free event aims to raise awareness and foster action on critical water issues facing our local ecosystems. Attendees will enjoy a series of engaging talks covering topics such as water pollution from various sources, including sewerage and agricultural run-off, and the resulting damage to delicate ecosystems. 

 

Experts will delve into water remediation projects, sharing innovative solutions for restoring balance to our rivers and wetlands. 

 

The day will also explore the rich history of The River Brue, highlighting its cultural significance through legends and folklore, as well as the historic ties between Glastonbury Abbey and local water sources. Through discussions, participants will gain a deeper understanding of how human activities impact natural systems and learn practical steps for soil health improvement and river guardianship.  The event promises a dynamic program with presentations running throughout the day, complemented by possible breakout sessions for in-depth conversations, interactive craft activities inspired by local artisans, and creative expressions through art and poetry. 

 

A possible river blessing will add a spiritual dimension, honouring the life-giving essence of our waters. We're pleased to welcome representatives from key organisations who will share their expertise and ongoing initiatives. 

 

Tea and coffee refreshments will be available for purchase. Everyone is welcome to come along, learn, and get involved in protecting our precious water resources - don't forget to secure your spot by registering for a ticket in advance (not released yet). 

 

This event is supported by Glastonbury Town Council, this is your chance to connect with like-minded individuals and contribute to a sustainable future for our rivers and communities.

 

The Living Brue Group has been born from the Climate and Resilience committee within Glastonbury Town Council.


Tuesday, January 27, 2026

RESOLVING THE WAR IN UKRAINE: MOVING THE IMMOVABLE


Resolving the War in Ukraine:

Moving the immovable 


Negotiations must put an end to the war in Ukraine, but at present negotiations are blocked over which state is to “own” the territories of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk - Ukraine or Russia? Russia will not accept defeat, and Ukraine will not accept having land taken from them by military means. The only way of resolving this deadlock is by giving a choice to the inhabitants of the disputed land.


Victory to whom?

It is nearly three years since Putin foolishly invaded Ukraine, thinking to would be over in three weeks. 


Trump’s peace plan basically hands victory to Putin; analysts fear that rewarding Putin for a gross violation of international law may encourage him or his successor to repeat his “special military operations” in Moldova and the Baltic states.


The EU is preparing to help Ukraine to fight on, which entails more loss of life, more destruction, more expense, more stalemate, and risk of escalation of the war, possibly involving a very severe outcome if Russia begins to lose. 




Peace Terms


Peace negotiations at present are over which state “owns” the Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk: Russia or Ukraine? The stakes are high.


The generally accepted view in the West three years ago was that the decision about peace terms is a matter for the Ukrainian nation, and that it is not up to other nations to decide what should be done. The Ukrainians must decide whether they want to fight on, or whether they must cede territory and give Putin what he wants. 


It is true that the final decision is up to the Ukrainian Government (and to some extent, therefore, the Ukrainian people), but it is also true that non-Ukrainian people should be allowed to think and talk about possible paths out of the present situation, because we are involved both emotionally and financially. It is also true that one prominent non-Ukrainian, Trump, is already very much involved. We have a right to think about  best way to bring this present severe bout of political insanity to an end. The plan put forward here does give Ukrainians a say in the outcome in a way that official plans do not.


Is there any way that the decision between a stalemated war and a Russian victory could be made less harsh? Yes, there is a way. 


Focus shift

Let the disputed territories of Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk be declared temporarily independent territories under the protection of the UN or some other neutral authority for an agreed number of years. After a decent interval, say two years at least, a series of well-designed, well conducted referenda is to be conducted, under the control of Swiss, who have long experience in carrying out successful referenda, as opposed to the British, who do not.


People power

The question put before the people would relate to which nation they would prefer to be associated with, and in which way? As an oblast, on the same terms as other Russian or Ukrainian oblasts, or perhaps more as a canton, with a great degree of autonomy? Again, the Swiss have long experience in organising a state composed of peoples  who have different languages and cultures, and moreover, do not have an undue amount of affinity with each other. The Swiss have successfully resolved their political differences, and they have much to offer the world.


The essence of this solution is to let the people decide. This approach takes the decision away from the well-fed politicians whose principles and red lines are irreconcilable and puts it into the hands of the people who are suffering. 


The people just need an end to the destruction and killing. They need peace and years of assistance in rebuilding their towns and infrastructure. After at least a couple of years, when normal life is somewhat re-established, they will be given a series of referenda on how they see their future.


They may want to go with Russia. They may decide they want to stay with Ukraine. They may decide that they want to remain autonomous for more years, to try out evolving systems of greater self government. 


It may take years, or even decades, to decide on a final outcome. There will be a lot of talking to be done, but talking is always better than fighting.


A new paradigm?

This peace settlement may even emerge as a model for other peace settlements, now or in the future, particularly since separatism, the desire of a people to “belong” to a different state to the one they currently “belong” to, is an important factor in many of the wars that are troubling our world.


Clearly, it is well worth our time to discuss this approach. However, it will be very difficult to get the message through to the people who make the decisions. Most politicians are more comfortable in telling people about how important it is for politicians to listen to the people than in actually listening to the people. However, the longest journey has to start with a single step, and for this journey from war to peace in Ukraine, we need concerned people to weigh up in their minds whether the people should be given the power to decide their own future.



 

Dr Richard Lawson 

Churchill

27/1/2026