In the past, humanity’s role in accelerating climate change was often underestimated. Many people considered climate change to be merely a natural trend that came and went, unrelated to human activity. However, as research and discussion among scientists progressed, that view gradually changed. Researchers have finally reached a consensus that human activities, ranging from the exploitation of nature to industrial emissions, have disrupted the Earth’s natural balance and contributed to the rate of climate change. Various studies also show that changes in natural processes not only affect ecosystems but also influence people’s behaviour and health. With the development of social sciences and psychology, it is now increasingly clear that climate change shapes the way humans behave and act. The impact is widespread, not only in terms of natural disasters, extreme weather, or disease outbreaks, but also in terms of socio-economic changes and demographic patterns.

The relationship between humans and climate change is actually very close. Daily activities such as the use of motor vehicles, industrial activities, and energy consumption produce harmful emissions that can damage the ozone layer, which protects the earth from ultraviolet radiation. On the other hand, climate change also shapes human behaviour, influencing social norms, attitudes, and even our habits. Psychological factors such as stress and tension caused by environmental pressures also contribute to these behavioural changes.

Furthermore, climate change can shift customs, attitudes, and norms that have long been the foundation of social relations. Research shows that global warming, which has been largely triggered by human activity since the 20th century, will have an impact on the social bonds that have united communities. Rising temperatures, for example, can trigger emotional reactions in the form of increased aggression and impulsive behaviour. If these conditions continue, changes in character and a surge in violence are highly likely. In the long term, this increase in aggression could even trigger conflict and war.

Climate change is now one of the greatest challenges to human life. Its impact on living creatures and vulnerable communities is increasingly becoming the focus of researchers in various fields. We have seen how rising temperatures, heat waves, floods, tornadoes, storms, droughts, forest fires, glaciers, and the disappearance of rivers and desertification processes have had serious effects. All of these phenomena can trigger health problems, both physical and mental, either directly or indirectly.

The impacts of climate change can manifest in many ways, some of which are immediately apparent, while others only become apparent over time. The effects can also be short-term or long-term. Sudden extreme events often trigger psychological responses similar to traumatic stress, thereby influencing well-known patterns of mental disorders. On the other hand, repeated or prolonged exposure to extreme weather can also have delayed consequences, ranging from post-traumatic stress to psychological disorders that can affect future generations.

So far, climate change has often been described as an issue that increasingly shows that humans are not immune to its threats. Physical health, for example, can be affected by rising temperatures, the spread of waterborne and insect-borne diseases, and the risk of malnutrition. Not to mention the direct effects of natural disasters and the social impacts that arise from forced displacement and conflicts triggered by environmental conditions. Some groups are even more vulnerable due to high exposure levels, limited economic or political power, or specific physiological conditions, such as indigenous peoples, the elderly, children, and individuals with pre-existing health problems.

Climate change is not only an environmental issue; it also has a major impact on human psychology. Although psychologists have been researching this issue for quite some time, most of their attention has been focused on matters such as risk perception, communication strategies regarding climate change, public attitudes towards the issue, and efforts to encourage environmentally friendly behaviour as a form of mitigation. Meanwhile, the mental health aspects related to climate change have only begun to receive attention in recent years, even though their impact continues to show a significant increase.

Mental health and climate change are interconnected through many complex pathways. To clearly see the hidden costs of climate change on psychological conditions and emotional well-being, as well as to uncover the often overlooked benefits of climate action, interdisciplinary work and a more comprehensive understanding are needed. By recognising the common root causes of climate challenges and mental health issues, and then designing joint solutions that benefit both humans and the planet, policymakers, health system leaders, and mental health professionals can build stronger systems and communities to cope with global pressures in the Anthropocene era.

The climate crisis must also be understood as a mental health crisis. Climate change hinders various efforts to improve psychological well-being around the world. Its impact manifests through direct experiences of extreme temperatures and unpredictable weather, prolonged disruption to various determinants of mental health, and psychological pressure from living under an existential threat that is not being taken seriously by leaders. As a risk multiplier, this situation exacerbates existing vulnerabilities, especially for groups and countries that are already disadvantaged.

Various conditions create these inequalities, such as weak governance, social and economic disparities, a culture of natural resource exploitation, and air pollution and ecosystem damage due to the use of fossil fuels. Ironically, these factors not only worsen mental health, but are also the root causes of the same problems that continue to fuel the climate crisis.

Ultimately, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue; it is a crisis that permeates the psychological realm and human well-being. Amid growing global awareness of the importance of mental health, the climate emergency has become a major threat that could hinder this progress. Rising temperatures, extreme weather, uncertainty about the future, and the pressure of living under an existential threat that leaders have failed to resolve all create a real mental burden. The impact is felt most severely by groups that were already vulnerable to begin with. Interestingly, the root causes are interrelated: social injustice, poor governance, and an extractive culture that damages the environment—all factors that exacerbate the climate crisis also contribute to the deterioration of mental health. Ultimately, addressing the climate crisis means fighting for our collective mental health.

References:

Cianconi, P., Betrò, S., & Janiri, L. (2020). The Impact of Climate Change on Mental Health: A Systematic Descriptive Review. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11, 74. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00074

Clayton, S. (2020). Climate anxiety: Psychological responses to climate change. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 74, 102263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102263

Lawrance, E. L., Thompson, R., Newberry Le Vay, J., Page, L., & Jennings, N. (2022). The Impact of Climate Change on Mental Health and Emotional Wellbeing: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence, and its Implications. International Review of Psychiatry, 34(5), 443–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2022.2128725

McMichael, A. J., Woodruff, R. E., & Hales, S. (2006). Climate change and human health: Present and future risks. The Lancet, 367(9513), 859–869. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68079-3

Solanki, Dr. R. P. (2016). Effect of Climate Change on Mental Health. International Journal of Indian Psychology, 3(4), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.25215/0304.054

Swim, J. K., Clayton, S., & Howard, G. S. (2011). Human behavioral contributions to climate change: Psychological and contextual drivers. American Psychologist, 66(4), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023472

Watts, N., Amann, M., Arnell, N., Ayeb-Karlsson, S., Belesova, K., Boykoff, M., Byass, P., Cai, W., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Capstick, S., Chambers, J., Dalin, C., Daly, M., Dasandi, N., Davies, M., Drummond, P., Dubrow, R., Ebi, K. L., Eckelman, M., … Montgomery, H. (2019). The 2019 report of The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: Ensuring that the health of a child born today is not defined by a changing climate. The Lancet, 394(10211), 1836–1878. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32596-6

If we look closer, philosophy is actually a radical and comprehensive way of thinking. It is an approach that explores various things in depth, not just stopping at the surface. Interestingly, philosophy and science actually discuss the same object: everything we can know. The difference is that philosophy tries to understand the big picture, while science focuses on specific parts according to the objectives of each field.

In this article, we will discuss further the various schools of thought in the philosophy of science, so that we can see how these different perspectives have influenced the emergence of the various forms of knowledge we know today.

The school of materialism includes several figures, namely Anaximenes, Thales, Anaximander, Democritus, Lamettrie, Thomas Hobbes, Spencer, Feuerbach, and Karl Marx.

The materialist school of thought holds the view that everything in this world is matter or, in other words, reality consists only of nature and physical things. It is not surprising that this idea sparked a great debate, especially among religious circles. In the 19th century, materialism was considered controversial because it rejected the existence of God (atheistic), something that contradicted the beliefs of society at that time.

In another view by Marx and Engels, materialism developed into historical materialism. This emphasises that human life is determined by material conditions: human activities, the environment, and basic needs that must be met. Society is seen as the result of human interaction with nature, so that even social and cultural differences still have the same material foundation. This foundation is also referred to as the ‘basis of life values’. This also confirms that all cultures depend on human relations with nature.

The second school of thought is idealism, which places reason or the ‘mind’ as the most fundamental thing. For this school of thought, the mind must be completely real, while matter is only a result or derivative of mental activity. Reality is considered to be composed of ideas, thoughts, and the soul, not physical objects.

Idealism provides a view that knowledge is a subjective mental process, so what we know does not always accurately describe the nature of the outside world. The reality we understand is greatly influenced by how the mind works.

The third school of thought, existentialism, emerged in the 20th century in France and Germany as a reaction to the collapse of Enlightenment optimism, particularly after the First World War, which destroyed Europe’s economic, political, and intellectual stability. When large systems lost their legitimacy and were no longer able to provide direction, existentialist thinkers offered a return to humanity as the centre of meaning and the determiner of one’s own life.

This movement also arose from social anxiety over the fear of war, manipulative human behaviour, collapsing values, and the identity crisis that plagued society. Religion was considered to have failed to provide answers, while humans felt threatened by their own actions. It was in this chaotic and uncertain situation that existentialism found its footing as a philosophy that called for authenticity, freedom, and personal responsibility.

The next school of thought was pragmatism, a philosophy that judges truth based on its usefulness. In other words, pragmatism considers something to be true if it is proven to be useful and can be applied in real life. This school accepts anything as truth as long as it has a practical and beneficial impact. Both personal experience and mystical truths can be used as a basis for action if they are proven to be useful. This is the main measure in pragmatism, namely benefits for practical life.

Finally, there is the school of phenomenology, which studies anything that appears in human consciousness. This approach is used to understand various social phenomena in society. Initially, phenomenology developed as a school of thought in philosophy.

The meaning of phenomenology became clearer after Hegel formulated it. He defined phenomenology as ‘knowledge as it appears to consciousness’. Simply put, phenomenology can be understood as the science of studying how a person describes what they see, feel, and perceive directly through experience without intermediaries.

Essentially, phenomenology encourages each individual to interact directly with and learn from the phenomena that constitute their lived reality. In its development, phenomenology is now widely used as an important research method for exploring the unique experiences of each individual in society.

Overall, various schools of thought in the philosophy of science show that the way humans understand reality is highly dependent on the perspective used. The differences that exist in each school of thought can enrich the philosophy of science and shape the various ways in which humans construct, interpret, and develop knowledge to this day.

References:

Baiti, R. (2016). PEMIKIRAN MANUSIA DALAM ALIRAN – ALIRAN FILSAFAT. Wardah, 16(1), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.19109/wardah.v16i1.361

Dasrimin, H. (2021). Aliran-Aliran dalam Filsafat Ilmu. Open Science Framework. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hb4vr

Junaidi, M. (2016). PRAGMATISME. Dar El-Ilmi : Jurnal Studi Keagamaan, Pendidikan Dan Humaniora, 3(1), 37–51.

Noonan, J. (2021). Historical materialism as mediation between the physical and the meaningful. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 47(9), 1043–1059. https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453720919917

Salim, I. (2010). ALIRAN FILSAFAT EKSISTENSIALIS. Jurnal Pendidikan Sosiologi Dan Humaniora, 1(2), 183–190. https://doi.org/10.26418/j-psh.v1i2.3893

Wita, G., & Mursal, I. F. (2022). Fenomenologi dalam Kajian Sosial Sebuah Studi Tentang Konstruksi Makna. Titian: Jurnal Ilmu Humaniora, 6(2), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.22437/titian.v6i2.21211

Have you ever felt annoyed by the incessant roar of vehicles, loud music from neighbours, or the sound of machines at work? At first glance, noise may seem trivial. However, in the long term, these unwanted sounds can become a serious environmental stressor, not only for our physical health but also for our psychological well-being.

Noise is one of the most common forms of environmental pollution. According to reports from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the European Environment Agency (EEA), exposure to noise is now recognised as a major threat to public health. In the European Union, for example, around 20% of the urban population is affected by traffic noise, causing 18 million people to experience severe discomfort and more than 5 million to suffer from chronic sleep disorders. This fact shows that noise is not just a minor annoyance to the ears, but a global problem that affects the quality of life of millions of people.

Psychologically, noise often triggers various disorders such as difficulty concentrating, sleep disorders, decreased productivity, and increased stress and anxiety. Some people even experience communication disorders, emotional exhaustion, and disruption of worship activities and rest time. Meanwhile, from a physical perspective, continuous exposure to noise can cause hearing impairment, somatic complaints, and even permanent deafness, especially in work or industrial environments.

Interestingly, the impact of noise is not only determined by the loudness of the sound, but also by how individuals interpret and respond to it. Everyone has a different perception of noise. For some, the sound of machinery may be considered normal, but for others it can be a source of tremendous stress. Research shows that factors such as the type of noise source, volume level, predictability, and the feeling of being able to control the noise greatly affect a person’s stress levels.

In recent years, awareness of the impact of noise on mental health has increased rapidly. Modern research shows that loud noises, especially from traffic, not only interfere with the heart and blood pressure, but can also affect the brain. Exposure to noise has been shown to trigger disturbances in the central nervous system and increase the risk of depression, anxiety, and even aggressive behaviour in children and adolescents. Biologically, noise can cause nerve inflammation (neuroinflammation) and oxidative stress in brain tissue, two factors that play a role in reducing mental function.

Furthermore, chronic exposure to noise also disrupts the circadian rhythm, immune system, and stress hormone balance in the body. These disturbances interact with each other to create a vicious cycle of stress that is difficult to break. Individuals who are continuously exposed to noise become more easily fatigued, irritable, and have reduced coping capacity. In the long term, this condition can foster feelings of helplessness, such as ‘learned helplessness,’ where a person feels unable to control the situation that is pressuring them.

More worryingly, stress caused by noise can also encourage unhealthy behaviour. Several studies show that people who live in noisy environments are more prone to smoking, consuming alcohol, or leading a passive lifestyle. These behaviours are actually forms of maladaptive coping, ways in which the body relieves stress, but they actually worsen mental and physical health.

However, the good news is that psychology offers various ways to help us adapt to noise. One of them is through adaptive coping strategies. Through approaches such as cognitive reframing, individuals can learn to change the way they think about noise, viewing it not as an uncontrollable threat, but as a stimulus that can be regulated or ignored. In addition, exercises such as breathing relaxation, meditation, and mindfulness have been proven to reduce physiological stress responses and help calm the mind in noisy situations.

The physical and social environment also plays a major role. For example, the presence of a small garden at home can increase positive perceptions of the surrounding environment, reduce the need for excessive coping, and improve sleep quality. Similarly, harmonious family relationships have been shown to strengthen self-regulation and reduce stress. Social support from those closest to us can act as a ‘natural buffer’ against environmental noise that is difficult to avoid.

In addition, joint community-based efforts are also important. Environmental psychologists can play an active role by educating the public about the impact of noise and how to deal with it. Stress management training programmes, noise awareness campaigns, or the design of public spaces that are conducive to mental well-being are concrete steps that can be implemented.

Ultimately, noise is not just a technical problem to be solved with soundproofing or traffic control. It is also a psychological challenge that needs to be managed from within ourselves through awareness, emotional regulation, and healthy social support. By combining environmental, social, and psychological approaches, we can create a new balance: a quieter life, even though the world around us is not always silent.

References:

Fyhri, A., & Klaboe, R. (2009). Road traffic noise, sensitivity, annoyance and self-reported health—A structural equation model exercise. Environment International, 35(1), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2008.08.006

Generaal, E., Timmermans, E. J., Dekkers, J. E. C., Smit, J. H., & Penninx, B. W. J. H. (2019). Not urbanization level but socioeconomic, physical and social neighbourhood characteristics are associated with presence and severity of depressive and anxiety disorders. Psychological Medicine, 49(1), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718000612

Hahad, O., Kuntic, M., Al-Kindi, S., Kuntic, I., Gilan, D., Petrowski, K., Daiber, A., & Münzel, T. (2025). Noise and mental health: Evidence, mechanisms, and consequences. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, 35(1), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-024-00642-5

Hahad, O., Prochaska, J. H., Daiber, A., & Münzel, T. (2019). Environmental Noise-Induced Effects on Stress Hormones, Oxidative Stress, and Vascular Dysfunction: Key Factors in the Relationship between Cerebrocardiovascular and Psychological Disorders. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, 2019, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4623109

Hidayat, S., Purwanto, P., & Hardiman, G. (2012). KAJIAN KEBISINGAN DAN PERSEPSI KETERGANGGUAN MASYARAKAT AKIBAT PENAMBANGAN BATU ANDESIT DI DESA JELADRI, KECAMATAN WINONGAN, KABUPATEN PASURUAN JAWA TIMUR. Jurnal Ilmu Lingkungan, 10(2), 95. https://doi.org/10.14710/jil.10.2.95-99

Lercher, P., Dzhambov, A. M., & Persson Waye, K. (2025). Environmental perceptions, self-regulation, and coping with noise mediate the associations between children’s physical environment and sleep and mental health problems. Environmental Research, 264, 120414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2024.120414

Qudais, S. A. A., & Qdais, H. A. (2005). Perceptions and attitudes of individuals exposed to traffic noise in working places. Building and Environment, 40(6), 778–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.08.013

Roswall, N., Christensen, J. S., Bidstrup, P. E., Raaschou-Nielsen, O., Jensen, S. S., Tjønneland, A., & Sørensen, M. (2018). Associations between residential traffic noise exposure and smoking habits and alcohol consumption–A population-based study. Environmental Pollution, 236, 983–991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.10.093

Thinking is one of the highest human faculties that distinguishes humans from other living beings. Through thinking, humans not only react to stimuli but also interpret, analyze, and create meaning from their life experiences. In philosophy, thinking is regarded as a reflective activity that enables humans to understand reality, the self, and the values of life.

Philosophy places thinking at the heart of the search for truth. Since ancient Greece, philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle emphasized the importance of critical thinking as the path to wisdom. Through thinking, humans can question assumptions, explore the reasons behind beliefs, and distinguish between opinion and knowledge.

Thinking in the philosophical sense is not merely a cognitive process but also an existential activity. Philosophy teaches that thinking is part of the effort to understand the meaning of human existence in the world. Thus, thinking serves as a bridge between empirical experience and inner reflection.

The way of thinking in philosophy varies depending on the school or tradition followed. Rationalism, for instance, relies on reason as the primary source of knowledge. Empiricism, on the other hand, emphasizes sensory experience as the foundation of thought. These two approaches often complement each other in forming a more complete worldview.

Beyond rational and empirical thinking, there is also critical thinking, which requires individuals not to accept information at face value. Critical thinking involves analyzing arguments, identifying biases, and evaluating evidence. In today’s information age, it has become an essential skill to differentiate between facts and opinions.

Philosophy also values reflective thinking—the ability to re-examine one’s own thoughts and actions. Reflection allows a person to understand the motives behind decisions and their impact on oneself and others. Through reflection, thinking becomes not just a logical tool but also a means for moral and ethical development.

Patterns of thinking in philosophy can be categorized as deductive and inductive. Deductive reasoning moves from general principles to specific conclusions, while inductive reasoning proceeds from particular observations to generalizations. Both complement each other in constructing strong arguments.

Besides these two main patterns, modern philosophy also introduces dialectical thinking, as developed by Hegel. In dialectics, every thesis gives rise to an antithesis, and from their tension emerges a synthesis. This pattern illustrates the dynamic nature of thought that evolves toward deeper understanding.

Thinking in philosophy is not only individual but also social. Philosophical thought often emerges through dialogue and debate. As in the Socratic method, conversation becomes a medium for uncovering truth through the exchange of ideas. Thus, thinking becomes a collective activity that enriches human perspectives.

Thinking is also closely tied to language. Without language, thought cannot be clearly articulated. Philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein even stated that the limits of language are the limits of one’s world. This means that one’s way of thinking is shaped by their linguistic ability to comprehend and express reality.

In the modern era, thinking is often reduced to a quick and superficial activity. However, philosophy emphasizes the importance of deep or slow thinking, which allows space for contemplation and understanding. Through deep thinking, humans can rediscover the true meaning of knowledge and life.

A sound philosophical way of thinking requires a balance between logic and intuition. Logic helps structure arguments coherently, while intuition enables insights that transcend pure rationality. These two aspects interact to produce genuine wisdom.

Philosophy also warns against dogmatic thinking—when one refuses to re-examine their beliefs. Dogmatism restricts intellectual growth and prevents learning from different perspectives. Hence, philosophy encourages open-mindedness and a continuous willingness to question.

Ultimately, thinking in philosophy is an endless journey. There is no absolute truth that can be held forever, for reality itself is ever-changing. Yet therein lies the beauty of thinking: it cultivates the awareness that the pursuit of truth is an infinite process.

Through thinking, humans discover themselves as conscious, rational, and reflective beings. Philosophy teaches that thinking is not merely a tool to understand the world but also to understand oneself. Thus, thinking becomes the essence of humanity and the path to true wisdom.