The Book written by John Broome, Talks about how we as individuals should understand, the full effect we are having, on our environment and ethical issues brought on by our emissions of greenhouse gases. He goes into a lot of detail describing the moral injustice we have caused for the future generations, and many humans today. If we continue to destroy the earth by emitting CO2 in the air, global warming will continue to melt the polar ice caps; we face a crisis that can potentially kill off thousands of people. Broome’s main issue in the book Climate Matters is the moral injustice of Knowing we are doing something wrong and not doing anything to change, because of our transgressions. Broome believes; many people throughout the world will be displaced, because of the constant rising seawater, and many people will die if we continue down this path of destruction. It may not seem like your contribution of CO2 into the Atmosphere can hurt anyone, but when nobody is doing anything to stop it adds up and can have a major effect upon many people around the world. The book Climate Matters was written to shed light on what is considered ethically unjust and what we need to do in order to stop us from destroying the planet, that has provided us with life. One principal argument the book makes is, if we are moral unjust do we need to do something to stop this and does being morally unjust mean anything to people now days or has world become so selfish that we have lost sight of what is right and wrong. Brooms leading argument says we should feel morally responsible as individuals, who emit CO2 gas to the atmosphere, to do anything we can to stop and take any action we can to help people understand the moral injustice of CO2 emissions. We ... ... middle of paper ... ... instead they push it aside because it isn’t affecting them immediately. I think that it is the obligation of our educators and government to help us build a society that doesn’t destroy or encourage the destruction of people and the environment. I’m not saying that this is what they are doing, but by doing nothing they might as well not be giving up on humanity and the world as a whole. The least they can do is establish rules and regulations on CO2 emissions and have academic programs in place that give everyone the opportunity to learn about waste and other factors that are affecting the planet in a negative way. With these educational programs in place nobody will be able to say they had no idea what they were doing and when the time comes to be judged for their injustices against the planet and other humans, they can be greeted with the judgment they deserve.
The Earth’s climate is changing as a result of human emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Do we, as individuals, have a moral responsibility to change our emissions-behaviour, so as to prevent current or future harm from anthropocentric climate change? For instance, suppose we go driving for fun on a beautiful Sunday afternoon in a gas-guzzling vehicle (Sinnott-Armstrong 333). In this case, have we caused any harm with regard to its effect on climate change? In “It’s Not My Fault: Global Warming and Individual Moral Obligations,” Walter Sinnott-Armstrong argues that such an action is completely harmless and that most or all common individual actions are too causally insignificant to make any difference regarding climate change (Sinnott-Armstrong
The article “Why Bother” written by Michael Pollan explains how the climate change and the carbon footprint effects the world. He states that there are many ways that we can do better to handle climate change and how to slow the process down. He thinks that it will take laws and a lot of money to stop this climate change because it’s going to take more than one person to solve this phenomenon. He proclaims that people are all waiting around on each other to make the first move but no one is moving. He says politicians want us to change our light bulbs to more efficient light bulbs s that use less energy. He understands how bad the world had gotten and people have to start going green by driving hybrid cars and buying “greener products” that will be better on the environment. This cannot be fixed by just one person he thinks that people have to influence each other and he hopes it will cause a chain reaction. He concludes that having your own garden or even a community garden will help reduce the carbon footprint.
Broom Claims, Human caused climate change, has caused much harm to many people around the world. He says this is due to a large number of individual actions, and gives us many reasons why these miniscule things are unjust, he believes we should be willing to change the way we live, to have a smaller carbon footprint. Injustice is one of the many things Broom has brought up in his book, to help us better understand what we have been doing to the larger community of the world, but he only gives us some incite into the transgression we are having. He never really gets into the real philosophical aspect of what it means to be unjust, he uses examples, but these have no real impact upon many people because he doesn’t make us feel any real compassion for those we have been harming in our community. Without the beauty of what this means, he has no real effect on people. He uses a lot of scientific information to help us understand what we are doing, but he doesn’t catch our spiritual understanding of what it means to be unjust. What does it mean to be unjust or immoral according to broom? ...
In the article “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math”, written by Bill Mckibben, he firstly opens up by saying that back in 2012, according to the statistics, we surpassed the global record high for climate temperature in our nation, destroying other previous records. Despite the research and the displaying of data, nobody is doing anything to adress the following issue. Mckibben outlines three distinctive numbers that outline the following issue., 2 degrees celsius, 565 gigations, and 2795 gigtons, which he uses to validitate and support his argument. Firstly, the ongoing problem of climate change in society is fundamentally a matter of individual moral responsibility that is inspired by the insight individuals are intentionally harming the environment. Secondly there is yet to be an effective collective state response to the issue of global warming, despite approaching two full decades of ongoing and reoccuring negotiations and the very near universal participation by states in the UNFCCC. Thirdly, because this issue has been put on hold for longer than it was innitially expected, greenhouse gases are being emitted into our atmosphere, polluting our environment. The South-North issue and an ongoing debate comes into effect as all the greenhouse gases that are created and used in the Northern hemisphere are being emmited into the southern hemisphere. Hence, my thesis is; despite the fact that global warming and climate change has been an ongoing problem globally for years, humanity has failed to resolve thiis issue as it quickly begins to escalate.
Climate change is a growing issue with the rise in industrial, commercial, and personal usage of energy. The burning of such things such as oil, coal and natural gases create toxic pollutants called “greenhouse gases.” The largest and most prevalent of greenhouse gases is carbon dioxide. (Overview of Greenhouse Gases). The wasteful history humanity has exhibited is deadly to the progression of our Earth. There are many things humanity can do in order to delay the inevitable warming of our planet and to prevent human-generated effects. Knowledge on the subject can significantly increase the awareness and subsequently improve the outcome of a global effort put forth by society. All that needs to be done, is to recognize our impact and how we can make a difference.
This paper seeks to explore the issue of collective responsibility in regards to climate change. More specifically, an analysis of Walter Sinnott-Armstrong’s foundational distinction between situations in which the government’s failure to respond makes civilians morally obligated to act or not to act. Sinnott-Armstrong incorrectly places all moral obligation on the government in a hypothetical bridge situation, however individual are also morally obligated to act to reduce potential pain, suffering, or death experienced. Examining Sinnott-Armstrong’s bridge example reveals how individuals are morally obligated in collective action issues, and how that relates to climate change. Further discussion demonstrates that individual obligation has
Fossil fuel emissions are the major cause in climate change and human beings are the ones using theses as their energy sources. The carbon dioxide that is emitted into the atmosphere cause changes in nature and the, “Violations of the natural conditions of life turn into global social, economic, and medical threats to people-with completely new sorts of challenges to the social and political institutions of highly industrialized global society” (Beck, 80). People need to throw away their anthropocentric views and realize that the issue is not only the environment being affected by global warming, but that their lives are being disturbed by this phenomenon also. Many people tend to try and not harm themselves, instead they aim to stay healthy so they can live long prosperous lives. German sociologist Urlich Beck’s idea that “nature is society and society is also ‘nature’” (Beck, 81) suggests that the argument on climate change is more personal than anything. It is something that should be discussed in the private sphere by individuals reflecting on their own lives and choices. Humans should not look at recycling, as an example, a way to reuse the resources the earth gives them to help it sustain, but instead as a way to ensure that there will always be resources for themselves and their descendants to survive. The carbon emissions
...lege and ability to do so must also donate money to the cause. The desire to change things must be established in order for anything to every actually change. People have to understand that by helping curb the Greenhouse Gas commissions, they are helping preserving not only everything as we know it today, but also everything for generations to come. After all, is it not our duty to help save this wonderful planet from a problem that we ourselves caused?
The articles “The Environmental issue from hell” by Bill McKibben and “The Obligation to Endure” by Rachel Carson both talk about the environmental consequences that people have caused. However, McKibben writes about Global warming and argues that it is a moral responsibility to preserve the earth, while on the other hand, Carson writes about pollution of the earth caused by man. McKibben article makes good points and supports his claim with facts which makes his article valid. Carson supports her idea with adequate information and factual evidence which also makes her article valid.
Secondly it does not postulate a full vindication of climate justice given its only partial allusion to all things cogitated as justice such as a person who pollutes significantly less yet has benefited from great injustices will face a smaller liability than someone who pollutes abstemiously but otherwise leads a saint like life ardent to realizing the ends of justice. The prejudiced wealth of the lower polluter may enable him to even pollute less say for example they have spent their Nazi gold on wind turbines. (Arneson, 2011)
One of the most compelling and difficult environmental problems society is facing today is climate change. People do not realize how much the environment has changed for the worse in the last ten years, until they are told that the last two decades of the 20th century have been the hottest in the last 400 years, according to climate studies (Conserve Energy Future). Today the carbon dioxide levels have reached 396.81 parts per million (ppm). “Carbon dioxide (CO2) has also increased over the last 100 years-- from about 300 ppm to 370 ppm. Interestingly, the majority of these additions have occurred in the last 50 years, when temperature increases have been slowest” (geocraft). There are no known solutions yet to reverse these effects in the environment, however there are many things people can do to prevent it from increasing. By implementing a carbon tax the government can tax corporations on how much carbon they emit into the atmosphere. With the extra money from the tax, scientist can invest in alternative ways to reduce how much carbon is emitted. Reducing climate change is going to take years and so nothing is going to get fixed anytime soon, but meanwhile we can use that extra money to begin cleaning up the atmosphere. There are many ways to explain climate change, some say its due to the emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere, others say it is the burning of the fossils fuels, some even say it’s the greenhouse gases. All of these sayings mean the exact same thing, no matter how one says it. I believe there are more convenient ways to solve climate change; and if the government would to implement a carbon tax on companies they will then be forced to re-evaluate all the carbon they emit to the environment and red...
For these reasons, global warming stands as one of the most daunting policy issues facing our world today. This is compounded by the debate over the very existence of climate change. While countless sources of empirical evidence testify to the very real presence of climate change the world over, considerable denial of the phenomenon still exists. The argument has been made that evidence about climate change is a gross overstatement, or in some cases, a complete fabrication. Despite the evidence to the contrary, many interest groups with considerable political clout have successfully perpetuated the argument that documented changes in the environment are a product of natural cyclical changes in climate, and are not associated with human activities. However, even the acceptance of this particular brand of reality is no grounds for the disregard of environmental consciousness. Even if one accepts the premise that recent climate change is not resultant of human activity, the rationale behind environmental conservation remains ...
Other ethical questions such as “How should we- all living today evaluate the well-being of the future generations” (Brome). Scientific data shows that Global climate change will have some lasting effects on the planet, ecosystems and humans. There are many “risks associated with climate change such as the risk of pathogen, and disease” this will affect future generations, and animals this is why we should reduce our emissions of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere (Crank and Jacoby). “The consequences of heightening greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere appear after a time lag, often decades or more” (Somerville). Even though the current generations are “benefiting from cheap use of burning fossil fuels, and using the atmosphere as a free dump for our waste products” all humans are obligated to find a cleaner way to live so we don’t set future humans up for failure (Somerville). Somerville also explains that within us burning these fossil fuels, and ignoring the consequences “we sentence our children and grandchildren to cope with the resulting climate change” (Somerville). Also we need to take action to prevent further damage of Earth’s climate not only for the future children of the world but other species that we share the planet with. In the article “The Ethics of Climate Change” by John Broome he states that the answer to this ethical question can be easy one without the need of a sophisticated philosopher (Broome). He say that the answer to ethical climate change questions can be answered by simple common sense thinking (Broome). “You should not do something for your own benefit that will harm another’s” (Broome). He asks the question which is worse the death of a child in 2108 or the death of a child currently living?” (Broome). John Broome argues that we have a responsibility to
In talking about global warming, we need to learn what causes the greenhouse effect. Rays from the sun are taken up and absorbed by water vapor that is natural in the atmosphere. The United States emits the largest man made greenhouse gases in the world. As Americans we must realize the responsibility to reduce the emissions. (Gore, Albert) Water Vapor is eighty percent of greenhouse warming. The last twenty percent results from other gases that are in very little amounts. A huge absorber of the sun’s heat rays is carbon dioxide. Us as humans release a lot of carbon dioxide. When fossil fuels are burned, they release big amounts of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is on the increase in our atmosphere due to car emissions. Approximately eighty percent of CO2 increases because of man’s use of fossil fuels. When there is more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere the more sun rays are absorbed. In result to this happening this will cause the earth and the earths atmosphere to warm. When the earth is warming, water temperatures will start to get warmer. Oceans and lakes will get warmer in result f...
William F. Baxter exemplifies this anthropocentric viewpoint. In his book People or Penguins: The Case of Optimal Pollution, he argues that society should respect and attempt to preserve environmental balance only if the benefits to humans outweigh the costs. Baxter claims that, since there is no normative definition of “pure” air or water, society should aim for a level of pol...