Jeremy Rifkin’s Entropy warns of energy consumption and the end of civilization through the law of entropy, but there is a counter argument that technological advances can slow the increase in entropy by making it possible to acquire energy.
In Entropy, Jeremy Rifkin applies the second law of thermodynamics, the law of entropy, not only to the scientific realm but also to society at large. As Rifkin explains the law of entropy and his arguments, he argues that it is not just limited to physical phenomena, but is equally applicable to the society and civilization we live in.
Jeremy Rifkin describes the law of entropy as “the amount of energy in the universe is constant, and the total entropy is always increasing.” To put it more simply, he says, “An increase in entropy means that the available energy is gradually decreasing.” Because of this, Jeremy Rifkin adds that “every time an event occurs anywhere in the world, the energy of the world is consumed, and the total entropy of the world increases.” From this perspective, he warns that if civilization continues to develop in its current mechanical and resource-consuming way, we will eventually reach a final equilibrium state of heat apocalypse and perish. Therefore, he argues that we should no longer rely on a mechanical worldview, but adopt a new one that consumes less energy and uses it more efficiently.
Rifkin expands the concept of “energy” to apply the law of entropy to a variety of social phenomena. Rifkin considers energy as a form of communication, not just the heat or electricity that we usually think of, but also the energy inherent in cost and fuel. While this approach is useful for analyzing energy, it is limited by its lack of consideration of qualitative aspects. For example, he explains that people are moving out of cities because a lot of the energy that goes into urban environments ends up adding to the entropy of the city. He sees urban crime, pollution, etc. as part of this problem. But the reality is that big cities are attracting more people, who enjoy the conveniences and opportunities of city life. What Rifkin misses is that the attractiveness of big cities can be more qualitative.
While the entropy analysis on which Rifkin’s argument is based provides a clear direction, it also has the limitation of not accounting for how long the process will take. In other words, his analysis suggests that if we continue on our current path of development, we will reach a thermal end state at some point, but we cannot predict when that point will be. This is because the law of entropy provides a direction for change, but it does not describe the specific rate or process by which that change will occur. So even if he is correct, the actual point at which we reach the heat apocalypse could be millions of years in the future. Even if our current worldview persists, the time to destruction could be much longer than we realize.
Rifkin also criticizes the mechanistic worldview, arguing that it accelerates the growth of entropy rather than progress. But technological advances don’t just accelerate energy consumption. Rather, advances in technology allow us to obtain new forms of energy more efficiently. For example, we can now extract oil from deep underground that was previously inaccessible due to lack of drilling technology, and we can utilize new sources of energy such as nuclear power. This means that energy is not just consumed, but can be acquired and processed into new forms. These technological advances prove that the mechanistic worldview is not just destructive in that it can simultaneously slow down energy consumption and entropy growth.
An important part of Rifkin’s argument for the future direction of energy use is that we should use renewable energy sources like solar, geothermal, and wind instead of consumable energy sources like oil. This is the centerpiece of his new worldview. In fact, thanks to technological advances, we now have access to these renewable energies, and we are learning how to utilize them more efficiently. This technological advancement has opened up the possibility of having more energy available to us, while keeping entropy growth in check.
Therefore, Rifkin’s claim that a mechanistic worldview simply increases entropy and leads to destruction shows that he is overlooking something. Energy consumption is rising, but at the same time, we’re moving toward sustainable development through renewable energy. Taking this into account, Rifkin’s arguments are only partially applicable due to the limitations of his time, and current technological advances and the development of renewable energy have the potential to provide a much more positive future than his theories suggest.
In conclusion, Jeremy Rifkin’s Entropy was notable for its attempt to apply scientific laws to social and cultural phenomena. His theory of entropy provided a new perspective on how we handle and consume energy, and in doing so, raised the importance of renewable energy. However, relying too heavily on the law of entropy to explain all of society’s problems also has the downside of overlooking qualitative factors. While we can agree with his arguments for using energy efficiently and reducing waste, the idea that a mechanistic worldview is simply destructive is worth reconsidering. Advances in technology are actually enriching our lives and opening up opportunities to explore sustainable energy.
