More handpicked essays just for you.
Global warming environmental ethics
Environmental Ethics, global warming and climate change essay
Global warming influenced by humans
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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 …show more content…
He gives an example of helping push a car over a cliff with a passenger locked inside. It takes five people to push that car off a cliff and five people are already pushing. If we join, we cause harm to that passenger locked inside, even though our act is not necessary nor sufficient for that harm because we intended that harm and our act is unusual (Sinnott-Armstrong 335). Hence, we should not see the act of driving on a beautiful Sunday afternoon as a cause of global warming or its harms, since the harm is not intended and driving is not unusual. The harms of global warming result from the massive quantities of GHGs in the atmosphere. GHGs are perfectly fine in small quantities, however the problem only emerges when there is too much of it. The individual act of a Sunday pleasure drive by itself does not cause the massive quantities that are harmful (Sinnott-Armstrong 335). However, we might believe that a Sunday pleasure drive raises global temperatures by an extremely small amount. Regardless, the exhaust on that Sunday does not cause any climate change, therefore we have no moral responsibility to change our emissions-behaviour, since it is these climate changes that cause harms to people. Global warming by
Although the argument is persuasive, the overall idea appears unorthodox for the reader at the beginning. This is because when the reader first thinks of global warming, the first to come to mind is fossil fuels and chemicals emitting in the air from factories and other manufacturing. The graph below is from a study completed by the World Resources Institute, showing the percentages and locations of where and how much greenhouse gases are involved with global
On July 18, 1984 one of America’s most horrific and shocking killings took place in San Ysidro, California. A man originally from Ohio committed the fourth-deadliest shooting massacre by a single perpetrator in United States history, killing twenty-one and wounding nineteen others. The “McDonald’s Massacre”, as it came to be called, was a tragic event in a San Ysidro McDonalds.
Chester Alan Arthur was born on October 5, 1830 in Fairfield, Vermont. The son of Malvina Arthur and the Reverend William Arthur, a passionate abolitionist, young Chester and his family migrated from one Baptist parish to another in Vermont and New York. The fifth of eight children, Chester had six sisters and one older brother. Before beginning school in Union Village (now Greenwich), New York, he studied the fundamentals of reading and writing at home.
In Michael Pollan’s “Why Bother?” Pollan argues that each person can contribute to helping to the environment by erasing their carbon footprints. In my everyday life I experience the choice of driving my car to work or riding my bike. More often than not I choose to drive my car because it is the easier option. I, along with many other people, believe that my individual impact will not cause a larger impact on the global scale. In Pollan’s essay, he makes each person think about the effect they are leaving on the environment and how each person, as an individual, can change his ways before it is too late. Wendell Berry, a naturalist and well-respected and influential writer, was a key factor in recognition of the environmental crisis and how to solve the problem.
Scranton believes that human beings are killing present life by ignoring the effects of global warming on the world. He continues to warn the reader that change is coming regardless of what people do now and that they human race must prepare for what is inevitably coming, as it will be the collapse of global civilization as it is known. Scranton states that this time we are living in, the anthropocene, presents humans with multiple challenges but mostly, “what it means to be human” (page 234). How to control the inevitable
In the essay, “Global Warming is Eroding Glacial Ice,” Andrew C. Revkin argues that global warming is the primary cause for many of the world’s natural disasters; including flash floods, climate change, and the melting of the polar ice caps. He includes multiple accounts of expert testimony as well as a multitude amount of facts and statistics to support his theory that global warming is a threat to the world. However, in the essay “Cold Comfort for ‘Global Warming’,” Phillip Stott makes the complete opposite argument. He argues that global warming is nothing to be worried about and the melting of the polar icecaps is caused by the interglacial period we are currently in. After reading both of these essays and doing extensive research on both viewpoints, I completely agree with Revkin that global warming is an enormous threat to our world today. My research not only helped me to take a stand but it also showed me the invalidity in Stott’s essay.
Will this century mark the decline of society? Is the future safe from the mistakes of mankind? In “Learning How to Die in the Anthropocene”, Roy Scranton suggests that the question we should be asking ourselves about global warming is not whether it exists or how it can be stopped, but rather how are we going to deal with it. The purpose of the article is to convince everyone that current life is unsustainable, and that nothing can be done to reverse the process; we must acknowledge that the future will be drastically different and plan in advance if civilization is to keep moving forward. Dr. Scranton develops a realistic tone that relies on logos, pathos, and ethos appeals to persuade readers of his claim. Scranton sufficiently backs up
Amos Bronson Alcott was a man of many talents and professions, including, but not limited to, educator, philosopher, conversationalist and poet. He was born on a farm near Wolcott, Connecticut, and formally educated only until he was 13, as his family did not have enough money to educate him any further. His dreams of attending Yale, therefore, died. However, he did continue teaching himself. And never really stopped reading and self-educating. Despite this, he never became very wealthy, and in fact, struggled most of his life to make enough money to support his family. Though not rich in material goods, he was rich in values. (Mott, 2). He stood up very strongly for what he believed in. He not only defended his ideals through his conversations and writings, but also through his actions.
At the turn of the 20th century, Herbert Croly – as far as the accelerating world was concerned – was a man without a name. Painfully shy and without many friends, he was admitted to Harvard in 1886 as one of 96 "special students" who would not be eligible for a degree. Perhaps the world should have realized he would one day be reckoned with when was given the former room of newspaperman William Randolph Hearst, who was expelled from Harvard a year before Croly entered its halls. But Croly remained aloof through his long stay at Harvard, which had more promising sons to look after. However, when in 1909 Croly published his first and most remembered book, The Promise of American Life, he was instantly recognized as a great political thinker. Eager to recognize him as one of its own, Harvard gave him his bachelor’s degree soon after the jubilant reviews were printed.
Gardiner, S.M, (2004) ‘Ethics and Global Climate Change’, Chicago Journals, Vol. 114 ( No. 3), Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/382247 [Accessed 12 March 2014]
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.
As cultural anthropologist Margaret Mead once said “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; Indeed it’s the only thing that ever has.” In an excerpt from an essay published in the New York Times Magazine, American public intellectual Michael Pollan reveals his goal to convince the ordinary of citizens America that they are capable of saving the world from climate change and to answer the unappeasable question of “Why bother?”. This inquiry stems from the belief that one person is not capable of making a difference in relation to the larger spectrum of Americans who continue to emit a large amount of C02, increasing the effects of climate change, and destroying the environment. Through the exploration of behavior change, and other personal alternatives aimed to reduce America 's carbon footprint, Pollan aspires to have
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
It is becoming increasingly certain that climate change will have severe adverse effects on the environment in years to come. Addressing this issue poses a serious challenge for policy makers. How we choose to respond to the threat of global warming is not simply a political issue. It is also an economic issue and an ethical one. Responsible, effective climate change policy requires consideration of a number of complex factors, including weighing the costs of implementing climate change policies against the benefits of more environmentally sustainable practices.
The first part of this essay discusses what the human species has done to deal with the problem of climate change. While some improvements have been made, the problem has not been addressed aggressively enough to stop the damage. What is amazing about this is the denial of so many people that problems exist. If they do realize the risks, they are simply not taking actions to contain the damage.