Filosofie 1 Inleiding in de Filosofie & Ethiek Voorjaar 2005 · Filosofie 1 Inleiding in de...

Filosofie 1Inleiding in de Filosofie & Ethiek

Voorjaar 2005Derde Bijeenkomst - 29 mei 2005

Inleiding in de milieufilosofie

Prof. Dr Hub ZwartDepartment of Philosophy & Science StudiesFaculty of Science, Mathematics & Computer ScienceRadboud University Nijmegenh.zwart@science.ru.nlwww.science.ru.nl/filosofie

1. Moderne wetenschap: profiel

Isaac Newton 1642 - 1727

Profiel van wetenschap

• Wil tot weten = wil tot macht• Observeren = modificeren• De wetenschapper stelt zichzelf en

anderen aan risico’s bloot

Faustische Wetenschap

Friedrich Nietzsche;Oswald Spengler

De faustische stijl:Dynamisch, energiek, actief, mobiliserend, exploiterend

Van wetenschappelijke naarindustriële revolutie

Jules Verne (1828 – 1905)

Jules Verne (1865)“Foul Weather”

The weather, hitherto so fine, suddenly changed; the sky became heavy with clouds. It could not have been otherwise after the terrible derangement of the atmospheric strata, and the dispersion of the enormous quantity of vapour arising from the combustion of 200,000 pounds of pyroxyle! … On the morrow the horizon was covered with clouds-- a thick and impenetrable curtain between earth and sky, which unhappily extended as far as the Rocky Mountains. It was a fatality! But since man had chosen so to disturb the atmosphere, he was bound to accept the consequences of his experiment.

Paul Crutzen:‘We have entered the anthropocene’

Crutzen, P. J., and E. F. Stoermer. 2000. The "Anthropocene". Global Change Newsletter. 41: 12-13.

Moderne wetenschap

• “Faustisch”• Natuur = grondstof• Wil tot weten = Wil tot macht• “Global environmental impact”Reactie:• Romantiek• Duurzaamheid

“Romantische reactie”

• Verdringing en terugkeer van de natuur• Geschiedenis van het Nederlandse

landschap

1. “Oernatuur”

Anton Mauve (1885)

2. Drooglegging

Inpoldering (“reclamation”)

Haarlemmermeer

Anton Mauve (1885)

Elisabethsvloed 1421

Watersnoodramp 1953

Deltawerken

Oosterscheldedam

Stormvloedkering

3. De terugkeer van de natuur

De terugkeer van de natuur

Konikspaarden

Natuurontwikkeling“Nieuwe natuur”

De Kerf

II. Duurzaamheid

Hans Jonas (1979)

• Das Prinzip Verantwortung (The Principle of responsibility)

• “Handel zo dat echt menselijk leven in de toekomst mogelijk blijft”

• Ethiek = comparatieve futurologie

Hans Jonas 1903-1993"Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik

für die technologische Zivilisation” (1979)

1979 -

Het faustische geweten

• Schuldgevoel• Wij zijn de oorzaak• Wij zullen beoordeeld worden• Klimaatsverandering:

verantwoordelijkheidsgevoel of wil tot beheersing?

De catastrofe

• Doemscenario• Wij zijn op weg naar einde• Wij zijn de oorzaak van de crisis

Elementaire catastrofe

• Water: zeespiegel stijgt, zeebevingen• Lucht: samenstelling van de atmosfeer

verandert, atmosferische storingen, orkanen

• Vuur: klimaatsverandering, temperatuursstijging

• Wordt de aarde onbewoonbaar?

Het catastrofe-scenario(“Doemdenken”)

Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) Thomas Malthus (1766-1834)

Catastrofe-scenario’s

• Club van Rome (“Grenzen aan de groei”)• Zure regen• Klimaatsverandering

Relativeringen

Oxygen Holocaust

• 2 billion years ago, the first world wide pollution crisis occurred, due to organisms that dumped oxygen as a waste product into the atmosphere. It had a dramatic and lasting effect on the environment and allowed oxygen-dependent life-forms (such as man) to emerge and develop.

Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan (1997) Microcosmos. Four Billion Years of Microbial Evolution. University of California Press.

Mens = “Politiek dier”

• “We weten wat we doen”• Wetenschappelijk onderzoek: de effecten

van ons handelen• Complexiteit• 21e eeuw: Duurzame en

natuurvriendelijke technologie

Bjørn Lomborg (2001) The scepticalenvironmentalist

Bjorn Lomborg (2001) The sceptical environmentalist

The views of a sceptical environmentalist upon the state of the world; are theenvironmental problems really as seriousas many of us think?

Part I: the LitanyChapter 1: things are getting betterChapter 2: why do we hear so much badnews?

Part II: human welfareChapter 3: measuring human welfareChapter 4: life expectancy and healthChapter 5: food and hungerChapter 6: prosperityChapter 7: unprecedented humanprosperity

III: can human prosperity continue?Ch. 8: are we living on borrowed time?Chapter 9: will we have enough food?Chapter 10: forests - are we losing them?Chapter 11: energyChapter 12: non-energy resources

Chapter 13: waterChapter 14: continued prosperity

Part IV: pollution: does it undercut humanprosperity?Chapter 15: air pollutionChapter 16: acid rain and forest deathChapter 17: indoor air pollutionChapter 18: allergies and asthmaChapter 19: water pollutionChapter 20: waste: running out of space?Ch 21: the pollution burden has Diminished

Part V: tomorrow's problemsChapter 22: our chemical fearsChapter 23: biodiversityChapter 24 global warming

Part VI: the real state of the worldChapter 25: predicament or progress?

Message• “The litany of our ever deteriorating environment. The

view of the environment that is shaped by the images and messages that confront us each day on television, in the newspapers, in political statements, such as: “Everyone knows the planet is in bad shape” (Time). “Humans have upset the delicate balance of nature, they have stripped the land of its green cover, choked the air and poisoned the seas”

• The imminent catastrophe or cataclysm• Not backed up by the available evidence, not in keeping

with reality• Reality and Myth• Most publicized fears are incorrect - this does not mean

we should not improve the environment

The sceptical environmentalist• Things are getting better, we are making

progress, we are not heading for a catastrophe• We must not act on myths but on facts• We must be more critical towards the all

pervasive litany of our ever deteriorating environment, shaped by images and messages that confront us each day. It is not backed up by the available evidence

• Dramatic cures proposed on the basis of this litany will have an impact much worse than the current affliction

The sceptical environmentalist

• Mankind’s lot has improved in terms of practically every measurable indicator

• Human centered-view: we have no option but to use humans as our point of reference

The sceptical environmentalist

• We must act upon sound evidence• Indicators• Long-term trends• Sound comparisons• In today’s global environment, with

massive amounts of information available, an infinite number of stories can be told

The sceptical environmentalist• The litany of our ever deteriorating environment.

“Everyone knows the planet is in bad shape” (Time).

• The story of the imminent catastrophe or cataclysm which is not backed up by the available evidence, not in keeping with reality

• Reality versus Myth• Most publicized fears are incorrect - this does

not mean we should not improve the environment

The sceptical environmentalist• The litany has pervaded the debate so deeply

and for so long that blatantly false claims can be made again and again without reference.

• This is not due to primary research in the environmental field; this generally appears to be competent and well-balanced

• It is due to the communication of environmental knowledge, which taps deeply into our doomsday beliefs

• Propaganda presented by environmental organisations such as Greenpeace and WWF is too readily picked up by the media

Moral Issues

• “Environmentally incorrect?”• “Do we want to handle global warming …

or do we want to use global warming as a stepping stone to other political projects?”

• “Technofixes, geo-engineering”

Michael Crichton (2004)

Peter Singer

One World• The American lifestyle … may lead to the deaths

of millions of people (p. 2)• For eons … people lived in separate worlds…

Now people living on opposite sides of the world are linked in ways previously unimaginable (p. 3)

• The revolution has created a global audience… We need to justify our behaviour to the whole world

• How well we come through the era of globalisation (perhaps whether we come through it at all) will depend on how we respond ethically to the idea that we live in one world (p. 13)

One World

• IPCC: scientific evidence that human activities are changing the climate of our planet (Third Assessment Report 2001)

• It is a scientific document, open to criticism, but it reflects a broad consensus of leading scientific opinion and is by far the most authoritative view

One World• Hurricanes and tropical storms will move farther

away from the equator and hit large urban areas that have not been built to cope with them

• Tropical diseases will spread• Food production will decrease notably in sub-

Saharan Africa• Sea levels will rise between 9 and 88

centimeters• Coastal ecosystems will change dramatically,

coral reefs will be destroyed

One World

• Our value system evolved in circumstances in which the atmosphere, like the oceans, seemed an unlimited resource, and responsibilities and harms were generally clear and well-defined… [Now] climate change has revealed bizarre new ways of killing people. By spraying deodorant at your armpit in your New York apartment, you could … be contributing to the skin cancer death of people living in Chile… How can we adjust our ethics to take account of this new situation?