Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang
the human sciences we often need toWithinassumptions before attempting a cost-maketype analysis which, as outlined inbenefitof this chapter, and IV.3 of Chapter 7, isIII.4with knowledge issues. Let’s revisitfraughttopic of climate change we briefly touch ontheChapter 7, IV.3. Recall that there was, andin2020 continues to be, disagreement aboutintosocial cost of carbon per tonne. In 2015 thethegovernment came up with a number ofUSworth of economic damages but, shortly$37the Stanford scientists argued itafterwards,$220. A more recent study in Nature Climatewasput forward a global social cost ofChangeof $417 per tonne, with widely differentcarbonfor different countries (Rickeetal2018).costsranges reflect difficulties in modellingThesequantifying climate change, and the impactandassumptions made by different groups ofofand stakeholders. Clearly this doesscientistsmean we abandon efforts to quantify thenotof reduction needed; the task of expertsscaleto negotiate a consensus and arrive at aisnumber.it is empirically-based, the carbon pricingAsis more tangible than the philosophicaltaskethical questions and knowledge claimsandin the climate justice debate. Forembeddedto occur in the race to respond toprogressclimate crisis, nations around the worldtheto work together, and that requires someneedagreement about ethical issues relatingminimumresponsibility and fairness. And fairness istodeeply complicated concept: the 2018 articleaRicke et al finds that India, for instance,byonly 6% of emissions but will bearcontributes20% of the global economic burden ofoverchange. What forms of knowledge will beclimateto accomplish such an unprecedentednecessaryAre our modes of knowledge productiontask?dissemination appropriate for navigatingandurgent challenges?theseIV. EthicsIV. EthicsTNAHPROOCEEN241
IV. Ethicschange … brings together three majorClimateto ethical action in a mutually reinforcingchallengesThe rst challenge stems from the fact that climateway.is a truly global phenomenon. Once emitted,changegas emissions can have climate eectsgreenhouseon the planet, regardless of their source.anywhereis often said to result in a prisoner’s dilemma orThisof the commons structure played out betweentragedystates: although collectively all countries wouldnationto limit global emissions so as to reduce thepreferof severe or catastrophic impacts, when actingriskeach still prefers to continue emittingindividually,At the same time, there are skewedunimpeded.at least in the short- to medium-term,vulnerabilities:of the most vulnerable countries and peoplemanythose who have emitted the least historically, andareemissions levels continue to be relatively low.whoseappears to be seriously unfair and casts a notableThisover both practical and theoretical eorts toshadowglobal cooperation.securesecond challenge is that current emissions haveTheintergenerational eects. Emissions ofprofoundlymost prominent greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide,thepersist in the atmosphere for a long time,typicallyto the global and intertemporalRespondingposed by the climate crisis couldchallengesan awareness and understanding ofrequiredifferent peoples, nations and cultureshowabout fairness, responsibility andthinkSome countries, such as Canadacooperation.even millennia. This too seems unfair, especially ifornegative impacts are severe and cumulative.futureaddition, the temporal diusion of climate changeInrise to an ethical collective action problem thatgiveseven more challenging than the traditional tragedyisthe commons both in its shape and because normalofof cooperation do not seem to be possible acrosskindsgenerations.third challenge to ethical action is that ourThetools are underdeveloped in many oftheoreticalrelevant areas, such as international justice,theethics, scientic uncertainty, andintergenerationalappropriate relationship between humans andtherest of nature. For example, climate change raisestheabout the (moral) value of nonhumanquestionssuch as whether we have obligations to protectnature,animals, unique places, or nature as anonhumanand what form such obligations take if we do.whole,addition, the presence of scientic uncertainty andInpotential for catastrophic outcomes put internaltheon the standard economic approach topressureproblems, and play a role in argumentsenvironmentala precautionary approach in environmental law andforthat some see as an alternative.policy(Ricke et al 2018). Should rich and poorchangecontribute equally to reduce emissions,nationsshould rich nations compensate the poororAt every level, issues of knowledgenations?ethics are woven into the discourse onandwarming and climate justice.globalradical argument calls for compensation for less-developed countries, which have contributedAto the problem and yet are already being impacted by it, having been made vulnerable to itlittle1. What are the knowledge claims and assumptions implicitly and explicitly made in this2. On what basis, using what assumptions, should decisions about possible compensation be8Climate justice: The perfect moral storm(Gardiner, Hartzell-Nicholls 2012)contributing to negative climate impacts for centuries,and Russia, may well benefit from climateFor discussionWho pays?through colonization.argument?made?242
- Page 197 and 198: II. Perspectivesfar this section ha
- Page 199 and 200: II. Perspectivesthe kind of problem
- Page 201 and 202: III. Methods and toolsthe scientifi
- Page 203 and 204: III. Methods and toolsunrecognized
- Page 205 and 206: III. Methods and toolshas a number
- Page 207 and 208: III. Methods and toolsthe link to t
- Page 209 and 210: IV. Ethicswas the wartime head of t
- Page 211 and 212: IV. Ethicsan essential, imperfect a
- Page 213 and 214: 8Human scienceschapter is about the
- Page 215 and 216: I. Scopeof an idea or theory coming
- Page 217 and 218: I. Scopecentral cause of the profes
- Page 219 and 220: I. Scopeidea of describing society
- Page 221 and 222: who had been placed at the ‘lower
- Page 223 and 224: explore perspectives on the existen
- Page 225 and 226: II. Perspectivesallegations of scie
- Page 227 and 228: we look at the simplifications that
- Page 229 and 230: II. PerspectivesIII. Methods and to
- Page 231 and 232: III. Methods and toolslack of diver
- Page 233 and 234: III. Methods and toolssensitivity
- Page 235 and 236: III. Methods and toolsMargaret Mead
- Page 237 and 238: III. Methods and toolstheir presenc
- Page 239 and 240: III. Methods and toolstold Mahbub,
- Page 241 and 242: III. Methods and toolsY. Thinley, a
- Page 243 and 244: III. Methods and toolsis the scope
- Page 245 and 246: III. Methods and toolssignificant c
- Page 247: III. Methods and toolsIV. Ethics7 d
- Page 251 and 252: last example brings together ideas
- Page 253 and 254: to show it how it was.” This was
- Page 255 and 256: I. Scope7 raises the question of wh
- Page 257 and 258: I. Scopeis more than a matter of po
- Page 259 and 260: II. Perspectivesqustion w xplord in
- Page 261 and 262: was not alon in rflting dply aoutCa
- Page 263 and 264: II. Perspectiveshistorial ontxt, ut
- Page 265 and 266: of Yugoslavia and th Sovit Union;ra
- Page 267 and 268: II. Perspectivesor indpndnt shools
- Page 269 and 270: III. Methods and toolswith an intrs
- Page 271 and 272: III. Methods and toolshistorian, jo
- Page 273 and 274: III. Methods and toolsinstad of oth
- Page 275 and 276: III. Methods and toolsmonks and lrg
- Page 277 and 278: III. Methods and toolsh had n ordrd
- Page 279 and 280: III. Methods and toolswould naiv,
- Page 281 and 282: IV. Ethicsin Chaptr 5. Grgory Young
- Page 283 and 284: IV. Ethicsis filld with xtraordinar
- Page 285 and 286: 10chapter explores the human encoun
- Page 287 and 288: I. Scopethe historical development
- Page 289 and 290: I. Scopehas the status of women art
- Page 291 and 292: I. ScopeTruth and knowledge in art:
- Page 293 and 294: I. Scopeterms: ElizabethSearchDesir
- Page 295 and 296: II. Perspectivesby Vermeer were rar
- Page 297 and 298: II. Perspectiveswas one thing van M
IV. Ethics
change … brings together three major
Climate
to ethical action in a mutually reinforcing
challenges
The rst challenge stems from the fact that climate
way.
is a truly global phenomenon. Once emitted,
change
gas emissions can have climate eects
greenhouse
on the planet, regardless of their source.
anywhere
is often said to result in a prisoner’s dilemma or
This
of the commons structure played out between
tragedy
states: although collectively all countries would
nation
to limit global emissions so as to reduce the
prefer
of severe or catastrophic impacts, when acting
risk
each still prefers to continue emitting
individually,
At the same time, there are skewed
unimpeded.
at least in the short- to medium-term,
vulnerabilities:
of the most vulnerable countries and people
many
those who have emitted the least historically, and
are
emissions levels continue to be relatively low.
whose
appears to be seriously unfair and casts a notable
This
over both practical and theoretical eorts to
shadow
global cooperation.
secure
second challenge is that current emissions have
The
intergenerational eects. Emissions of
profoundly
most prominent greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide,
the
persist in the atmosphere for a long time,
typically
to the global and intertemporal
Responding
posed by the climate crisis could
challenges
an awareness and understanding of
require
different peoples, nations and cultures
how
about fairness, responsibility and
think
Some countries, such as Canada
cooperation.
even millennia. This too seems unfair, especially if
or
negative impacts are severe and cumulative.
future
addition, the temporal diusion of climate change
In
rise to an ethical collective action problem that
gives
even more challenging than the traditional tragedy
is
the commons both in its shape and because normal
of
of cooperation do not seem to be possible across
kinds
generations.
third challenge to ethical action is that our
The
tools are underdeveloped in many of
theoretical
relevant areas, such as international justice,
the
ethics, scientic uncertainty, and
intergenerational
appropriate relationship between humans and
the
rest of nature. For example, climate change raises
the
about the (moral) value of nonhuman
questions
such as whether we have obligations to protect
nature,
animals, unique places, or nature as a
nonhuman
and what form such obligations take if we do.
whole,
addition, the presence of scientic uncertainty and
In
potential for catastrophic outcomes put internal
the
on the standard economic approach to
pressure
problems, and play a role in arguments
environmental
a precautionary approach in environmental law and
for
that some see as an alternative.
policy
(Ricke et al 2018). Should rich and poor
change
contribute equally to reduce emissions,
nations
should rich nations compensate the poor
or
At every level, issues of knowledge
nations?
ethics are woven into the discourse on
and
warming and climate justice.
global
radical argument calls for compensation for less-developed countries, which have contributed
A
to the problem and yet are already being impacted by it, having been made vulnerable to it
little
1. What are the knowledge claims and assumptions implicitly and explicitly made in this
2. On what basis, using what assumptions, should decisions about possible compensation be
8
Climate justice: The perfect moral storm
(Gardiner, Hartzell-Nicholls 2012)
contributing to negative climate impacts for centuries,
and Russia, may well benefit from climate
For discussion
Who pays?
through colonization.
argument?
made?
242