Let's not start insulting philosophers of science here. I do not believe that most philosophers of science see it as their role to discourage inquiry, but rather see their role as doing things such as analyzing how terms gain meaning and refer to things, how we can establish the truth or falsity of statements, and so on. They try to make explicit what is usually implicit in scientific inquiry.
_______________ Ken Caldeira Carnegie Institution for Science Dept of Global Ecology 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA +1 650 704 7212 [email protected] http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 1:33 AM, Charles H. Greene <[email protected]> wrote: > When we are on the verge of truly catastrophic climate change, I wonder > what philosophers of science will offer us as an alternative? Obviously, if > they wish to discourage scientists from even exploring possible > geoengineering options, they must have alternatives to offer, right? > > > > > On Jan 18, 2014, at 10:31 PM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > http://anthem-group.net/2014/01/18/what-would-heidegger-say-about-geoengineering-clive-hamilton/ > > What Would Heidegger Say About Geoengineering? Clive Hamilton > > Abstract: Proposals to respond to climate change by geoengineering the > Earth’s climate system, such as by regulating the amount of sunlight > reaching the planet, may be seen as a radical fulfillment of Heidegger’s > understanding of technology as destiny. Before geoengineering was > conceivable, the Earth as a whole had to be representable as a total > object, an object captured in climate models that form the epistemological > basis for climate engineering. Geoengineering is thinkable because of the > ever-tightening grip of Enframing, Heidegger’s term for the modern epoch of > Being. Yet, by objectifying the world as a whole, geoengineering goes > beyond the mere representation of nature as ‘standing reserve’; it requires > us to think Heidegger further, to see technology as a response to disorder > breaking through. If in the climate crisis nature reveals itself to be a > sovereign force then we need a phenomenology from nature’s point of view. > If ‘world grounds itself on earth, and earth juts through world’, then the > climate crisis is the jutting through, and geoengineering is a last attempt > to deny it, a vain attempt to take control of destiny rather than enter a > free relation with technology. In that lies the danger. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
