Climate Denial. During the denial stage, the person might experience a variety of physical symptoms – numbness, sweating, weeping. People also choose to refuse evidence supporting environmental loss. They may also refuse to accept the scientific reasoning in fear of facing the implications. To deny the reality of loss, they may ignore the potential consequences and the need for action – despite believing in science. This also prevents us from providing a prompt and adequate response to combat the environmental threat.

 

‘So it’s that simultaneity of being fully aware and conscious and not denying the gravity of what we’re creating, and also having to get up in the morning and provide for my family and fulfil my obligations in my work.’ – Mazur, 2019.

 

One use of denial is a way to avoid the reality of loss, however, some forms of denial may be necessary or useful. The term “Functional Denial” (coined by climate scientist Susanne Moser) highlighted that denial is a necessary medium for humans to carry on functioning in the world we live in, as we start to comprehend the reality of the loss simultaneously. Functional denial then might serve as a form of hope for us to live in the face of an enormous problem, but not denying real-world environment complications. The basis of denial is also supported by Paul Slovic. He and his colleagues also view denial as a way for “getting on with one’s life”. The numerous hazards we faced and the inability to attend to all maybe the rationale behind our denial of the reality or severity of the environmental threats. Some risks may be ignored – in an attempt for us to avoid an obsessive paranoia with risks and remain psychologically healthy.

 

Click the arrow to go to the next page.