Aria Paez

ABE 170A
24 February 2018

Global Warming and Ethics

Morally, we all have all had a part to play in the existence of global warming. Climate

change presents a severe ethical challenge, “forcing us to confront difficult questions as

individual moral agents, and even more so as members of larger political systems.” Global

warming is an intergenerational problem that we must all face. It doesn’t only affect us, humans,

but other species as well. The root of global warming begins with the advancement of technology

of the years. With the advancements in technology came many positive factors, but also many

that have affected our Earth’s life. We have made drastic changes to the Earth, our fingerprint of

the changes we have done over the years are clearly shown when you see the amount of

pollution, forest destruction, wildlife has been affected.

In an article by Conforth, we are able to see how much humans have truly affected the

world we live in. Scientists have expressed concern for the state of the environment and the

necessity for change to happen. Change that must be made in order for migration, human

adaptation, and response. In a conservative estimate, scientists say we have approximately fifteen

years to change the human patterns that have led to patterns and rising of CO2 levels. That

means that if we fail to make a change, events that are already happening today will only

continue to happen and become catastrophic. The rising CO2 levels are only the beginning;

subsequent global warming, increasingly violent weather patterns, and rising sea levels will

affect populations all over the world. However, it won’t be those living in first-world countries

who will face the brunt of the damage, but those living in poorer countries, or first-world

countries who will be immediately affected by this.

 In order for there to be change, the fact that global warming exists will have to be

accepted all around. For there to be change, we must enact policies to enforce the change. Many

people are skeptical about the existence of global warming. Today, although more than ninety-

seven percent of scientists agree that climate change is happening, the “United States is currently

facing one of its most anti-science Congresses” to ever occur in the past of the U.S. (Figure 1)

Senators and Congressmen to even go as far as to claim that climate change is nothing but a hoax

invented by scientists to advance their own agendas.

The public belief of the scientific existence of global warming is very different than the
actual belief of global warming in the scientific community.
(Figure 1)

While there have been many policies that were made in order to not only raise awareness

of climate change but to make an effort to reduce our carbon footprint and more. The issue of

global warming was never as much debated until now. In the UK, they have had more luck with

being able to try to create policies that will try and reduce the amount of damage we are causing

to the Earth. With a Parliamentary Bill going through the House of Commons, the UK

Government under Prime Minister Gordon Brown giving the go-ahead to the building of more

nuclear power stations. There are massive publicity campaigns within the UK regarding how all
of us can lessen our individual “carbon footprint” by turning down the central heating, using the

car less, and turning off the television and computer instead of leaving them on “stand-by.”

Industrial companies including Lever Faberge, Ltd., which manufacture Persil washing powder

are spending a small fortune advertising their “green credentials.” Debates around the existence

of global warming are being held globally with arguments both for and against being presented

by eminent physicists and ecologists. The issues with trying to create policies that will help to

reduce the amount of greenhouse gases, pollution, and the rising levels of CO2 is that many

politicians are strongly against the existence of climate change.

John Bellamy Foster says in Ecology Against Capitalism, there is a concept of

“domination of nature” which he describes as “the idea that nature exists to serve humans and to

be a servant to humans.” Humans tend to think of themselves as the dominant race on Earth, we

are the cost of deforestation, the extinction of certain animals, and climate change. Foster traces

some of the factors that reduce capitalism to its dangerous role against ecology. He says, "a large

part of the answer as to why contemporary society refuses to recognize the full human

dependence on nature undoubtedly has to do with the expansionist logic of a capitalist system

that makes the accumulation of wealth in the form of capital the supreme end of society" (Foster

2002).

In an article written by Cerutti, we are able to distinguish and discusses the risks of global

warming in general and risks linked to human agency. Between the objective and the subjective

notion of responsibility, also raising the questions of ‘whose responsibility?’ and of the link

between responsibility and justice. Global warming is considered to be one of the most serious

threats to the well-being, including the psychological health, of all people in all parts of the

world. It is of particular significance to indigenous peoples. For example, those from small island
states, those who inhabit low-lying deltas, and those who do not have access to economic

resources that might afford protection or escape. It becomes a moral issue in that our actions

today stand to impact negatively on others in the immediate and foreseeable future. This will

affect people in places where they have not had the access or technology to cause such damage

to the health of the Earth. Those who hold the least blame are the ones who are going to pay the

most. How can we consider that fair? Is that a tribute to our morals?

As the first generation living in the Age of Global Warming, we may be the last

generation to be able to do anything about it. We hold the responsibility to do something about it.

We may have not been the ones to cause the issues we are now living with, but we are going to

be the first with the technology and ability to do anything to change. The ones before us will

have the excuse of not knowing, the ones after will have nothing they can do about it, for them it

will be too late. Antholis and Talbott, in an effort to educate the readers about global warming

and its effects, discuss the last two decades of climate change diplomacy, explaining the national

and international factors that have influenced and often impeded the negotiations. The job to fix

what we created will be left up to the “Big 4” being European Union, U.S., China, and India. The

United Nations alone cannot alone produce a global deal, the leading countries will have to lead

the process. (Antholis 2010)

There is time to make change, to force change. As we have all read, the work of enacting

policies and enforcing new ways to develop technology and build for the future will not be easy.

However, we must fix the mistakes of those who came before us. It will be up to us to change the

way we reduce our effect on our planet. John Broome, discusses the fundamental findings of

mainstream climate change science. The world is warming and human activities are the dominant

cause of it. Broome believes we will only make a difference if we change the way we live. We
must offset all our emissions of heat-trapping gases as well as think of other issues that should be

taken into account with the uncertainty of global warming. The effect this will have on human

lives as well as future generations and the long-lasting effect it could have on population will be

alarming if we continue to allow it to happen. (Somerville 2013)

Hence, if we truly believe that something should be done about climate change, it is only

because we use our moral frameworks to evaluate climate change events, our role in bringing

them about, and the alternatives to our action. This moral way of thinking allows us to take into

account the problem and constraints on what would count as relevant solutions. If we want there

to be a future for our future generations to live in, we must make change now, before it is too

late.
References (MLA format)
Antholis, William, and Strobe Talbott. Fast Forward : Ethics and Politics in the Age of Global
Warming, Brookings Institution Press, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral-
proquest-com.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/lib/UAZ/detail.action?docID=536945.

Barber, Christopher. "A Moral Climate: The Ethics of Global Warming." Cistercian Studies
Quarterly, vol. 45, no. 2, May 2010, pp. 221-223. EBSCOhost,
ezproxy.library.arizona.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a
2h&AN=50843342&site=ehost-live.

Cerutti, F. (2010). Defining risk, motivating responsibility and rethinking global warming.
Science and Engineering Ethics, 16(3), 489-99.
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/10.1007/s11948-009-9176-8

Cornforth, S.C. Int J Adv Counselling (2008) 30: 145. https://doi-

org.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/10.1007/s10447-008-9052-2

Foster, John Bellamy. Ecology Against Capitalism. Cornerstone Publications, 2003.

Gardiner, Stephen. “Opinion | Why climate change is an ethical problem.” The Washington Post,
WP Company, 9 Jan. 2016, www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2016/01/09/why-
climate-change-is-an-ethical-problem/?utm_term=.aa184f93ae8a.

Somerville, Richard C. J. “The Quarterly Review of Biology.” The Quarterly Review of Biology,
vol. 88, no. 4, 2013, pp. 326–327. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/673764.