One thing which I found fascinating about Professor Fleming’s talk was the comparison of different ways in which people react to the threat of global warming.  He mentioned responses ranging from hedonism to apocalypticism to activism.  I think that any of the responses that involve turning away from the problem can be classified as a kind of hedonism.  Although it is a fairly different reaction from the typical images of hedonism as involving parties, risk-taking, and general uncaring about the future, a reaction such as becoming invested in apocalypticism and joining a monastery or otherwise deciding that all is illusion and passively accepting the eventual end of life as we know it due to climate change, is a kind of hedonism.  It is still a withdrawal, a giving up, a passing of the responsibility.  Likewise, retiring to a microutopia is another kind of hedonism.  It invokes a sense of “I got mine.”  A microutopia in the face of global warming might be nice for the people inside of it, at least for a while, but it again is a giving up.  Broadly speaking, there are only two responses for those convinced of the reality of human-caused climate change – giving in, or fighting back.