Sorry, I meant to post the below to this thread, in response to Ken's query, but hit the wrong button. On the other hand, the post of Andrea and Christopher makes me wonder how it will get interpreted.... the very approach to "ethics" here suggests a conventional framework in which what I raise might not seem to make much sense....But why did Lewis Thomas say that it (the "four letter" concept referenced below), might eventually be seen as "one of the major discontinuities in human thought"? It is such a big idea because it ultimately calls into question far-reaching things like the very subject for any ethics. What is the "entity" of the ethics, the individual? What is that? There are ten times more cells without my nucleic DNA than with it, inside my own body, so what become of "my" interests? Like arguing about the "unit of selection" in evolutionary theory, arguments about what define "superorganisms" are immensely impactful to the very foundations of considering values for human behavior, ethics.
Hi, Ken - That there's "nothing new under the sun" is equally true for philosophy and solar radiation management, I suppose, yet this doesn't prevent philosophy from continuing on, changing, and, yes, sometimes circling its wagons over millennia. I think that, philosophically speaking, there's something important and different in our time, if not entirely new, that entirely surrounds geoengineering but isn't just the geoengineering itself. But sorry, to get into it one needs to take up that uber-dangerous "four letter word," as it's been called. Don't worry, I won't name it. Fred Pearce said that "if ---- dare not speak her name in Nature, then shame on science." Moral philosopher Mary Midley made a strong case that this represents a a major change in philosophy for our time. Her book Science and Poetry is all about tracing lines of thought from Lucretius through Dawkins (I'm not sure I am convinced by how she posits De Rerum Natura in relation to modern thought, but it makes a most interesting read), finally focusing on the "four-letter" approach as a new way of getting beyond certain old "atomist" arguments. Lynn Margulis sometimes said that Americans seem particularly prone to feel that it isn't important to have any philosophy, but if one wants to get into a discussion of geoengineering and philosophy, it would seem to me almost impossible to stay shy from the new "four- letter" world and all the disputes about it and what it really means - indeed, one could even say the dirty word IS the philosophy of geoengineering: as Midgley points out, the word geophysiology was introduced specifically to frame the "four letter" concept, launching with it a 'medical model' in which the planet is conceived something like a patient to be doctored......wouldn't that be geoengineering? So, the new ethical issue, Ken, is ------! Cheers, Nathan On Apr 7, 1:12 pm, Andrea Gammon <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ken, John, and all, > > You are definitely right in part. Many of the issues raised by > geoengineering are familiar issues in ethics involving questions of harm, > risk, uncertainty, potential moral corruption, and participation. > > Other issues are familiar but perhaps scaled up. These would be issues like > the (alleged) moral hazard, the whole politics of geoengineering, a > particularly challenging type of responsibility to future generations, and > the question of whether this is a problem best suited to a technical fix. > > And then there are probably a couple of issues that are new(-ish) in this > context. These might include the morality of intentional manipulation of > earth systems at this level, what this does to the idea of 'natural', and > questions about fairness in regards to climate manipulation. Broad > discussions about hubris and the proper role of humans in the biosphere > have also been cropping up in discussions of geoengineering by > environmental ethicists. > > To John's suggestion that this should be treated as merely an engineering > problem, one might note (with David Keith and others) that engineers design > solutions for for particular clients/publics. What counts as a solution > depends on the values people hold. This means that engineers are compelled > to incorporate moral values in their work. And of course there is a whole > literature is science studies (somewhat controversial) about the presence > of values in much of science. > > On our end and in our work, we encourage those involved in the more > technical aspects of geoengineering to entertain ethical questions in the > discussion. Ethicists are going to be hovering around the periphery anyway, > for instance, there is a panel on the ethics of geoengineering at the > International Society for Environmental Ethics meeting in June. Numerous > parties, from Crutzen to the Royal Society to the NSF, see ethics as a > legitimate and essential part of the discussion. > > Best, > Andrea and Christopher > > On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Ken Caldeira < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > Having but an undergraduate degree in Philosophy, you can forgive me for > > asking stupid questions, but ... > > > Does geoengineering raise any ethical issues not already considered by > > historical figures such as Aristotle, Hume, Kant, and so on? > > > Isn't the ethics of making decisions that affect others not involved in > > making the decisions a problem as old as humanity? > > > I just don't understand how there is anything new here for philosophy. > > > Surely there are difficult decisions to be made with moral dimensions, but > > I just can't imagine how geoengineering could pose fundamentally new > > philosophic problems. > > > Perhaps someone can compensate for my failure of imagination and tell me > > in what way geoengineering poses fundamentally new philosophic problems not > > previously addressed. > > > _______________ > > Ken Caldeira > > > Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology > > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA > > +1 650 704 7212 [email protected] > >http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab @kencaldeira > > > *Currently visiting * Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies > > (IASS)<http://www.iass-potsdam.de/> > > > *and *Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Resarch > > (PIK)<http://www.pik-potsdam.de/> > > *in Potsdam, Germany.* > > > On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:58 PM, Andrea Gammon <[email protected]>wrote: > > >> The Mansfield Center for Ethics and Public Affairs at the University of > >> Montana (with support from the National Science Foundation) is pleased to > >> announce the launch of the Ethics of Geoengineering Online Resource Center. > > >> We have attempted to make this an exhaustive resource for materials, > >> organizations, and events related to geoengineering and ethics. We will > >> continue to work to make the site increasingly comprehensive, accessible, > >> and engaging. We welcome feedback and suggestions about significant > >> resources that are not yet included. Please bring to our attention any > >> papers, events, and other media you think may be missing. > > >> Visit the site at: > >> <https://ch1prd0102.outlook.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=OWAMf8GxrUmH3DmLPhvEm...> > >>http://www.umt.edu/ethics/resourcecenter/default.php > > >> Please email feedback or suggestions to <[email protected]> > >> [email protected] > > >> Thanks! > > >> Andrea Gammon > >> Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Philosophy > >> University of Montana, '13 > > >> Christopher Preston > >> Associate Professor of Philosophy and Fellow at the Program on Ethics and > >> Public Affairs > >> University of Montana > >> * > >> * > > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> "geoengineering" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> [email protected]. > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
