Aldous Huxley recognized this. Its the whole basis of Brave New World (but we've covered that topic so many times on HUbski that I won't beat a dead horse). But its the reason that I agree with this: There are engineering solutions that currently exist to lots of our current problems. For example, if we all were vegetarians, food would be cheaper, the environment would be healthier, we would be healthier, etc. Its simple solution to a deep and deepening problem. But these types of solutions aren't acceptable since they require large scale qualitative social change.The mainstream seeks placidity while the edge seeks stimulation.
In a way, when we ask, is there a sustainable future, we are not really asking about fossil fuels or feeding 9 billion people. We are asking can the Manufactured Normalcy Field absorb such and such changes?
IMO this could be described as a disconnect between the Normalcy Field and an inescapable future. No doubt the discussion of climate change is distorted by the Normalcy Field: If it's not obviously happening, it's simply not happening. The definition of it 'happening' is then 'when the Normalcy Field can't absorb it'. -Which is really what we are hoping to avoid in the first place.