Source: Deep Learning on Medium
We should also consider that the changing of the physical environment is also a kind of evolution. Some ever existent forces act with time and location being the primal factors. Take a rock being broken down into sand. The water cycle- climate. Rivers carving a valley.
It is possible that the goals of both biological and physical evolution are not competitive but collaborative.
Hence, biological evolution ends up being sustainable because the environment it deals with is inherently sustainable.
Human technological innovation builds an environment focusing on efficiency as has been mentioned by you. Why is efficiency the deciding factor? It’s eligible because it has a centralised goal, meaning optimising a single function- money. This results in disproportion of resources- conflicting the goal of sustainability.
Decentralisation is successful if there is a common goal but need not be singular. Centralisation is successful if there is a consensus about a singular goal, not necessarily common. There is no line which separates them, only pathways.
From what can be inferred “sustainability” is the only major goal that fits both centralisation and decentralisation. This is directly related to what Carlos has discussed about scarcity and abundance.
The question that emerges is whether the scarcity we are in and increasingly moving towards can be converted to abundance? Our ecosystem has a nature of making us comply eventually.
Thank you Carlos for this thought improving article.