The paper explores how the framework of systemic risks can help govern the risks imposed through solar climate engineering research. The central argument is that a systemic perspective of risk is a useful tool for analysing and assessing the risks imposed through Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) research. SAI is a form of climate engineering that could cool the planet by enhancing its albedo through the injection of aerosols into the stratosphere. Researching such a technology creates systemic (...) risks with a strong sociotechnical component. This component consists of the potential societal harm that a developing or new technology might cause to existing norms, values, institutions, and politics. The systemic risk framework is a valuable heuristic for this case, given the complex interdependencies of societal systems, infrastructures, markets, etc. At the same time, the systemic risk framework can be enhanced through the inclusion of a more robust and reflected ethical considerations on technological risks. Consequently, this article seeks to supplement the systemic risk governance framework with insights from technology ethics. Specifically, the paper offers an ethically reflective conception of societal value dynamism and stakeholder engagement and participation, tying it to existing systemic risk governance approaches. (shrink)

Although still highly controversial, the idea that we can use technology to radically alter our environment in order to mitigate the climate challenges we now face is becoming an ever more discussed approach. This chapter takes up a specific climate engineering technology, carbon capture, usage, and storage (CCUS), and highlights how this technology works and how its governance still needs further work to ensure that it is aligned to the ideal of sustainable development. Given that climate (...) engineering technologies like CCUS have the potential to ameliorate many of the climate issues and support the SDGs, there remains a lacuna of inserting these globally impactful technologies within a normative political framework to respect that proper responsibility is attributed. The aim of the chapter is to examine the concept of accountability, how it has been traditionally understood in the literature, and why a polysemic and multidimensional account of accountability is required if climate engineering technologies like CCUS are actually to support sustainable development. This may serve as a first theoretically informed basis for reflection on how to create a synergy between the responsible deployment of climate engineering innovation and the achievement of the SDGs targets, one that can shed light on how justifications and decisions about sustainable strategies and constraints are managed, taken and communicated. (shrink)

Climate change threatens to infringe the human rights of many. Taking an optimistic stance, climate engineering might reduce the extent to which such rights are infringed, but it might also bring about other rights infringements. This Forum, leading off the special issue on climate engineering governance, engages three scholars in a discussion of three core issues at the intersection of human rights and climate engineering. The Forum is divided into three sections, each authored (...) by a different scholar and discussing a distinct aspect of this relationship. First, Toby Svoboda gives an overarching view of three competing approaches to human rights, grounded in philosophy; then, Holly Jean Buck looks at lessons from how the climate migration conversation brings a human rights approach to a climate policy issue; and finally, Pablo Suarez illustrates how a humanitarian approach to climate engineering works with a human rights framework. The conclusion of the Forum draws together points of overlap across the three sections and suggests a path forward for policy and research on this topic. Together, the sections show that climate engineering, should it materialize, will pose novel human rights challenges, and may well force reconsideration of how human rights are applied as a guide to action. (shrink)

The burgeoning literature on the ethical issues raised by climate engineering has explored various normative questions associated with the research and deployment of climate engineering, and has examined a number of responses to them. While researchers have noted the ethical issues from climate engineering are global in nature, much of the discussion proceeds predominately with ethical framework in the Anglo-American and European traditions, which presume particular normative standpoints and understandings of human–nature relationship. The current (...) discussion on the ethical issues, therefore, is far from being a genuine global dialogue. The aim of this article is to address the lack of intercultural exchange by exploring the ethics of climate engineering from a perspective of Confucian environmental ethics. Drawing from the existing discussion on Confucian environmental ethics and Confucian ethics of technology, I discuss what Confucian ethics can contribute to the ethical debate on climate engineering. (shrink)

Climate engineering with stratospheric sulfate aerosol injections (SSAI) has the potential to reduce risks of injustice related to anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases. Relying on evidence from modeling studies, this paper makes the case that SSAI could have the potential to reduce many of the key physical risks of climate change identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Such risks carry potential injustice because they are often imposed on low-emitters who do not benefit from (...) class='Hi'>climate change. Because SSAI has the potential to reduce those risks, it thereby has the potential to reduce the injustice associated with anthropogenic emissions. While acknowledging important caveats, including uncertainty in modeling studies and the potential for SSAI to carry its own risks of injustice, the paper argues that there is a strong case for continued research into SSAI, especially if attention is paid to how it might be used to reduce emissions-driven injustice. (shrink)

Although Indic perspectives toward nature are now well documented, climate engineering discussions seem to still lack the views from Indic or other non‐Western sources. In this article, I will apply some of the Hindu and Jain concepts such as karma, nonviolence (Ahiṃsā ), humility (Vinaya ), and renunciation (Saṃnyāsa ) to analyze the two primary climate geoengineering strategies of solar radiation management (SRM) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR). I suggest that Indic philosophical and religious traditions such as (...) Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism offer ethical concepts to call for humility in all acts of climate engineering leading to a favoring of CDR over SRM and a favoring of lifestyle changes (particularly vegetarianism) over both. I demonstrate these concepts by introducing the five great elements from the Hindu philosophy, two Hindu legends from Hindu mythology, the Indic ethical ideas of karma, renunciation, and humility, and the moral authority of Gandhi. (shrink)

This book analyzes major ethical issues surrounding the use of climate engineering, particularly solar radiation management techniques, which have the potential to reduce some risks of anthropogenic climate change but also carry their own risks of harm and injustice. The book argues that we should approach the ethics of climate engineering via "non-ideal theory," which investigates what justice requires given the fact that many parties have failed to comply with their duty to mitigate greenhouse gas (...) emissions. Specifically, it argues that climate justice should be approached comparatively, evaluating the relative justice or injustice of feasible policies under conditions that are likely to hold within relevant timeframes. Likely near-future conditions include "pessimistic scenarios," in which no available option avoids serious ethical problems. The book contends that certain uses of SRM can be ethically defensible in some pessimistic scenarios. This is the first book devoted to the many ethical issues surrounding climate engineering. (shrink)

This thesis explores the ethical challenges that a potential research program for solar climate engineering via Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) could incur. These ethical challenges are comprised of epistemic hurdles in relation to the research process, as well as societal questions of justice and the value of nature. The thesis proposes a variety of tools and approaches to assess and possibly govern the risks and uncertainties invoked by the research of SAI and its societal implications. The methodological approach (...) is based mainly on ethical and philosophical analysis and reflection and the main findings take the form of discursive argumentation and normative reflection. (shrink)

Contrary to political and philosophical consensus, we argue that the threats posed by climate change justify population engineering, the intentional manipulation of the size and structure of human populations. Specifically, we defend three types of policies aimed at reducing fertility rates: choice enhancement, preference adjustment, and incentivization. While few object to the first type of policy, the latter two are generally rejected because of their potential for coercion or morally objectionable manipulation. We argue that forms of each policy (...) type are pragmatically and morally justified tools for preventing the harms of global climate change. (shrink)

A collection of original and innovative essays that compare the justice issues raised by climate engineering to the justice issues raised by competing approaches to solving the climate problem.

This important edited collection addresses ethical issues associated with solar radiation management (SRM), a category of climate engineering techniques that would increase the planet’s reflectivity in order to offset some of the impacts of anthropogenic climate change. Such techniques include injecting sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere or brightening marine clouds with seawater. Although SRM has the potential to cool the planet by reducing the amount of incoming solar radiation absorbed by the planet, it raises a wide array (...) of difficult and interesting ethical issues. Engineering the Climate makes an important contribution to addressing many of these issues. (shrink)

Ethics, Policy & Environment, Volume 15, Issue 2, Page 241-243, June 2012.

Climate concepts are crucial to understand the effects of human activity on the climate system scientifically, and to formulate and pursue policies to mitigate and adapt to these effects. Yet, scientists, policymakers, and activists often use different terms such as “global warming,” “climate change,” “climate crisis,” or “climate emergency.” This advanced review investigates which climate concept is most suitable when we pursue mitigation and adaptation goals in a scientifically informed manner. It first discusses how (...) survey experiments and social science reviews on climate frames draw normative recommendations about which terms to use for public climate communication. It is suggested that such normative claims can be refined by including the scientific alongside lay uses of a climate concept, and by using explicit assessment conditions to evaluate how suitable a concept is for formulating mitigation and adaptation goals. Drawing on philosophical theories of conceptual change in science and conceptual engineering, a novel framework with two assessment conditions is introduced and then applied to “global warming,” “climate change,” “climate emergency,” and “climate crisis.” The assessment suggests that currently, “climate crisis” is most suitable to formulate and pursue climate mitigation and adaptation goals. Using this concept promotes the epistemic goals of climate science to a high degree, bridges scientific, political, and activist discourse, and fosters for democratic participation when articulating climate policies. (shrink)

Anthropogenic climate change poses some difficult ethical quandaries for non-anthropocentrists. While it is hard to deny that climate change is a substantial moral ill, many types of non-human organisms stand to benefit from climate change. Modelling studies provide evidence that net primary productivity (NPP) could be substantially boosted, both regionally and globally, as a result of warming from increased concentrations of greenhouse gases. The same holds for deployment of certain types of climate engineering, or large-scale, (...) technological modifications of the global environment in order to prevent or slow anthropogenic climate change. For example, solar radiation management with stratospheric aerosol injections could benefit plant life by promoting enhanced photosynthesis, increasing diffuse radiation, and reducing heat stress. This has a surprising implication: from some non-anthropocentric perspectives, certain scenarios of climate change and climate engineering might bring about morally better states of affairs when compared to emission-mitigation baselines. (shrink)

Geoengineering; specifically Solar Radiation Management ; has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges; some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual; or state; acting independently ; versus more consensual; internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set (...) of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models; I offer a short; relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime. (shrink)

Individual and collective agents, especially affluent ones, are not doing nearly enough to prevent and prepare for the worst consequences of the unfolding climate crisis. This is, I suggest, partly because our existing conceptual repertoires are inadequate to the task of motivating climate-stabilizing activities. I argue that the concept CLIMATE LEGACY meets five desiderata for concepts that, through usage, have significant potential to motivate climate action. Contrasting CLIMATE LEGACY with CARBON FOOTPRINT, CLIMATE JUSTICE, and (...) CARBON NEUTRALITY, I clarify some advantages of thinking in terms of the former. I conclude by discussing some climate legacy-enhancing practical proposals that merit consideration. (shrink)

Dale Jamieson has claimed that conventional human-directed ethical concepts are an inadequate means for accurately understanding our duty to respond to climate change. Furthermore, he suggests that a responsibility to respect nature can instead provide the appropriate framework with which to understand such a duty. Stephen Gardiner has responded by claiming that climate change is a clear case of ethical responsibility, but the failure of institutions to respond to it creates a (not unprecedented) political problem. In assessing the (...) debate between Gardiner and Jamieson, I develop an analysis which shows a three-part structure to the problem of climate change, in which the problem Gardiner identifies is only one of three sub-problems of climate change. This analysis highlights difficulties with Jamieson’s argument that the duty of respect for nature is necessary for a full understanding of climate ethics, and suggests how a human-directed approach based on the three-part analysis can avoid Jamieson’s charge of inadequacy. (shrink)

Abstract: Climate change presents a critical challenge that demands advanced analytical tools to predict and mitigate its impacts. This paper explores the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in enhancing climate modeling, emphasizing how AI-driven methods are revolutionizing our understanding and response to climate change. By integrating machine learning algorithms with diverse data sources such as satellite imagery, historical climate records, and real-time sensor data, AI improves the accuracy, efficiency, and granularity of climate predictions. The paper (...) reviews key AI techniques, including neural networks and ensemble models, and their applications in simulating extreme weather events and forecasting long-term climate trends. Additionally, it examines the impact of AI-enhanced climate models on policy-making and strategic planning. Despite significant advancements, challenges such as data quality, computational demands, and model interpretability remain. This study underscores the potential of AI to transform climate modeling and highlights areas for future research and development to harness these technologies for a sustainable future. (shrink)

Climate change temperature prediction plays a crucial role in effective environmental planning. This study introduces an innovative approach that harnesses the power of Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) within the Just Neural Network (JustNN) framework to enhance temperature forecasting in the context of climate change. By leveraging historical climate data, our model achieves exceptional accuracy, redefining the landscape of temperature prediction without intricate preprocessing. This model sets a new standard for precise temperature forecasting in the context of (...) class='Hi'>climate change. Moreover, our research provides valuable insights into the pivotal factors influencing temperature variations, making significant contributions to environmental science and climate mitigation strategies. (shrink)

In line with Christopher Preston’s argument in the introduction to this volume, I argue here that, although it is helpful to identify potential injustices associated with SRM, it is also crucial both to evaluate how SRM compares to other available options and to consider empirical conditions under which deployment might occur. In arguing for this view, I rely on a distinction between two types of question: (1) whether SRM would produce just or unjust outcomes in some case and (2) whether (...) it would be just to deploy SRM in that same case. The former question pertains to whether some distribution of benefits and burdens is morally good or bad, whereas the latter pertains to whether some action or policy is morally permissible, impermissible, or obligatory. Although related, these two uses of justice do not come to the same thing. It may be that some climate policy involving SRM carries risks of substantial distributive injustice and yet is permissible or even obligatory. This is because, as I argue, considering what would be just to do should be comparative, taking into consideration both empirical conditions and the morally valuable and disvaluable features of alternative climate policies. (shrink)

Several philosophers have recently argued that policies aimed at reducing human fertility are a practical and morally justifiable way to mitigate the risk of dangerous climate change. There is a powerful objection to such “population engineering” proposals: even if drastic fertility reductions are needed to prevent dangerous climate change, implementing those reductions would wreak havoc on the global economy, which would seriously undermine international antipoverty efforts. In this article, we articulate this economic objection to population engineering (...) and show how it fails. We argue, first, that the economic objection paints an inaccurate picture of the complicated relationship between demographic change and economic growth, and second, that any untoward economic effects of fertility reduction can be mitigated with additional policies. Specifically, we argue that supplementing fertility reduction with policies that facilitate the emigration of younger people from developing nations to developed nations could allow for both global reductions in GHG emissions and continued economic stability. Further, we show that moral arguments against such unprecedented increases in immigration are unsuccessful. We conclude that population engineering is a practical and morally justifiable tool for addressing the twin evils of climate change and global poverty. (shrink)

Climate change is an existential risk reinforced by ordinary actions in afuent societies—often silently present in comfortable and enjoyable habits. This silence is sometimes broken, presenting itself as a nagging reminder of how our habits fuel a catastrophe. As a case in point, global warming has created a state of urgency among wine makers in Spain, as the alcohol level has risen to a point where it jeopardises wine quality and thereby Spanish viticulture. Eforts are currently being made to (...) solve this problem technologically by developing (non-GMO) strains of yeast that produce less alcohol. If successful, this could help save Spanish viticulture. This kind of technological solution is routinely criticised for ofering simplistic “techno-fx” solutions to solve complex societal problems. However, it is not clear what features are criticised by the notion of techno-fx and hence how to avoid this criticism. In our interpretation, the techno-fx notion is not exclusively used as a dismissive term. The notion points to a general virtue of engineering: to create technological solutions that work silently in the background. This asset of technological solutions might sometimes be problematic and sometimes not. Hence, it needs to be analysed case-by-case by paying attention to the moral relevance of the hidden implications of the technology and of the unrefective actions and habits that they facilitate. Such moral analysis will in turn inform strategies for foregrounding this technology to counteract silencing. We discuss what this means in the case of modifying yeast as a viticultural climate resilience strategy. (shrink)

Technological innovations are increasingly promoted as solutions to climate change. However, many innovations, including Carbon Capture and Storage, bioplastics, and glacier geo engineering, face significant limitations, high costs, and unintended consequences that undermine their sustainability benefits. Using Granular Interaction Thinking Theory (GITT), grounded on information theory, quantum mechanics, and Mindsponge theory, in this study, we analyze how excessive technological innovations create an “innovation curse” and contribute to the erosion of Indigenous and Local Knowledge. Our findings reveal that market (...) and institutional biases favor high-tech solutions, sidelining proven ecological strategies that operate within planetary boundaries. We propose the eco-surplus framework, which emphasizes the integration of Indigenous and Local Knowledge and nature-based solutions as scalable, cost-effective climate interventions. Transitioning from an “eco-deficit” to an “eco surplus” culture requires institutional shifts that prioritize ecological intelligence over proprietary technologies. Our study emphasizes the urgency of aligning sustainability efforts with regenerative, community-driven practices to foster long-term environmental resilience. (shrink)

Amid escalating climate crises, an increasing number of scholars contend that prevailing approaches to climate action are fundamentally inadequate. In her commentary “Beyond Climate Isolationism,” Jennie C. Stephens (2022) critiques the dominant paradigm of climate isolationism—a perspective that frames climate change as a narrowly defined technical challenge, solvable primarily through carbon reduction targets and engineering innovations.

This study examines sustainable architectural design and project management strategies for climateresilient buildings in South-Eastern Nigeria using a qualitative research methodology. In the face of increasing climate challenges such as flooding, erosion, and rising temperatures, the region’s built environment demands innovative approaches that not only minimize environmental impacts but also enhance infrastructure resilience. Data were gathered through in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and document analysis with architects, project managers, policymakers, and community stakeholders. Such collaborative insights are critical to understanding (...) the complexities of adapting design practices to local environmental conditions. The analysis revealed that effective climate-resilient building strategies integrate sustainable materials, passive design principles, and adaptive project management practices. Stakeholders highlighted the importance of iterative design processes that incorporate feedback from the local context, as well as the need for robust policy support to enforce environmental standards. Furthermore, findings indicate that successful projects not only reduce energy consumption and maintenance costs but also promote occupant comfort and long-term sustainability. This research underscores that the integration of design innovation with efficient project management is essential for transforming traditional construction practices in the region. The study concludes by proposing a framework for incorporating sustainable design and adaptive management strategies into future building projects, aiming to inform policymakers, architects, and developers on best practices for resilient urban development in South-Eastern Nigeria. (shrink)

The strongest arguments for the permissibility of geoengineering (also known as climate engineering) rely implicitly on non-ideal theory—roughly, the theory of justice as applied to situations of partial compliance with principles of ideal justice. In an ideally just world, such arguments acknowledge, humanity should not deploy geoengineering; but in our imperfect world, society may need to complement mitigation and adaptation with geoengineering to reduce injustices associated with anthropogenic climate change. We interpret research proponents’ arguments as an application (...) of a particular branch of non-ideal theory known as “clinical theory.” Clinical theory aims to identify politically feasible institutions or policies that would address existing (or impending) injustice without violating certain kinds of moral permissibility constraints. We argue for three implications of clinical theory: First, conditional on falling costs and feasibility, clinical theory provides strong support for some geoengineering techniques that aim to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Second, if some kinds of carbon dioxide removal technologies are supported by clinical theory, then clinical theory further supports using those technologies to enable “overshoot” scenarios in which developing countries exceed the cumulative emissions caps that would apply in ideal circumstances. Third, because of tensions between political feasibility and moral permissibility, clinical theory provides only weak support for geoengineering techniques that aim to manage incoming solar radiation. (shrink)

Misinformation and biased information significantly impact public perception and political decisions, especially on critical issues such as climate change and environmental conservation. This study aims to understand how indeterminacy and contradiction influence public perception and policy formulation by applying neutrosophic theory to model the complexity and multi-dimensionality of ignorance. Using neutrosophic Likert scales, we capture a nuanced spectrum of opinions on the scientific certainty of human impact on climate change. The results are analyzed through a k-means clustering algorithm (...) to identify patterns and segment participants into groups based on their levels of truth, indeterminacy, and falsehood. This approach reveals deeper insights into public perceptions and aids in evaluating their implications for effective communication and policy-making. (shrink)

There is an undeniable link between overpopulation and climate change. Overpopulation is dangerous in its own right, and the facts about the current state of affairs are truly terrifying, yet heavily overlooked and underreported. Overpopulation has led to—and continues to accelerate—deforestation. The scale of deforestation is also overlooked and heavily underreported, as is the critical role of forests in ecosystems, including their influence on healthy rain patterns. Changes in rain patterns are among the most dangerous consequences of climate (...) change, which will lead to shortages of drinking water in the foreseeable future all over the world. This, too, will be caused by deforestation, as the facts confirm. This article will explain how deforestation has caused shifts in humidity, directly contributing to the severity and frequency of droughts and floods. Additionally, changes in relative humidity are responsible for higher temperatures and the shrinking of glaciers and polar ice caps. These water reservoirs are diminishing not only because they are melting but also because they are drying out—all as a consequence of altered humidity. This shift in humidity has led to a seemingly absurd paradox: on one hand, the air is becoming drier; on the other hand, the total amount of water in the atmosphere is increasing. Scientists have been ignoring the causes and consequences of this paradox for many years. All of this has been directly influenced by deforestation, which, in turn, has been driven by the growing number of humans on this planet. We have far exceeded sustainable population levels. Another problem that exacerbates all issues related to climate change is human intervention in the climate through various weather engineering methods, often referred to as geoengineering. These methods include cloud seeding, CO2 capture, and others. They all worsen the situation, and humans fail to realize this, largely because we have ignored the enormous role of humidity levels in our ecosystems—particularly their impact on rain patterns. All of this is a consequence of deforestation. The solutions to climate problems lie in afforestation and global depopulation. These measures are relatively easier and faster to implement. Unfortunately, for them to succeed, humankind must first acknowledge these issues as the real causes of climate change and act swiftly, especially since deforestation continues unabated. We are in danger of having wasted time meant to save our planet by barking up the wrong tree—CO2 emissions. We are losing essential time. We cannot afford to be a society that "doesn’t look up!" The facts in this article are undeniable. The problem is deforestation, which is caused by overpopulation. Let the facts speak! (shrink)

If deployed, aerosol geoengineering (AG) could involve unfairness to both present and future parties. I discuss three broad risks of unfairness that an AG deployment policy might carry: (1) causing disproportionate harm to those least responsible for climate change, (2) burdening future parties with the costs and risks of AG, and (3) excluding some interested parties from contributing to AG decision-making. Yet despite these risks, it may be too hasty to reject AG deployment as a potential climate change (...) policy. I argue that since it is very unlikely that a completely fair climate change policy will be pursued, we have ethical reason to prefer some “incompletely fair” policy. Given various facts about our world, it might be the case that some AG policy is ethically preferable to many other feasible climate change policies, even if AG carries deeply problematic risks of unfairness. (shrink)

Some authors have called for increased research on various forms of geoengineering as a means to address global climate change. This paper focuses on the question of whether a particular form of geoengineering, namely deploying sulfate aerosols in the stratosphere to counteract some of the effects of increased greenhouse gas concentrations, would be a just response to climate change. In particular, we examine problems sulfate aerosol geoengineering (SAG) faces in meeting the requirements of distributive, intergenerational, and procedural justice. (...) We argue that SAG faces obstacles to meeting the requirements of all three considered kinds of justice, because its impacts can harm some persons and communities much more than others; it poses serious risks to future generations; and SAG is especially prone to unilateral implementation. While we do not claim that SAG ought not to be implemented, we argue that it is the responsibility of proponents of SAG to recognize and address these ethical obstacles before advocating its implementation. (shrink)

According to the “Lesser of Two Evils Argument,” deployment of solar radiation management (SRM) geoengineering in a climate emergency would be morally justified because it likely would be the best option available. A prominent objection to this argument is that a climate emergency might constitute a genuine moral dilemma in which SRM would be impermissible even if it was the best option. However, while conceiving of a climate emergency as a moral dilemma accounts for some ethical concerns (...) about SRM, it requires the controversial claim that there are genuine moral dilemmas, and it potentially undermines moral action guidance in emergency scenarios. Instead, it is better to conceive of climate emergencies as situations calling for agent-regret. This alternative allows us coherently to hold that SRM may be morally problematic even if it ought to be deployed in some scenario. (shrink)

Concerns about the risks of unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions are growing. At the same time, confidence that international policy agreements will succeed in considerably lowering anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions is declining. Perhaps as a result, various geoengineering solutions are gaining attention and credibility as a way to manage climate change. Serious consideration is currently being given to proposals to cool the planet through solar-radiation management. Here we analyze how the unique and nontrivial risks of geoengineering strategies pose fundamental questions (...) at the interface between science and ethics. To illustrate the importance of integrated ethical and scientific analysis, we define key open questions and outline a coupled scientific-ethical research agenda to analyze solar-radiation management geoengineering proposals. We identify nine key fields of coupled research including whether solar-radiation management can be tested, how quickly learning could occur, normative decisions embedded in how different climate trajectories are valued, and justice issues regarding distribution of the harms and benefits of geoengineering. To ensure that ethical analyses are coupled with scientific analyses of this form of geoengineering, we advocate that funding agencies recognize the essential nature of this coupled research by establishing an Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications program for solar-radiation management. (shrink)

Various approaches have emerged over the last several decades to meet the challenges and complexities of anticipating and responding to the potential impacts of emerging technologies. Although many of the existing approaches share similarities, they each have shortfalls. This paper takes as the object of its study Anticipatory Ethics for Emerging Technologies (ATE) to technology assessment, given that it was formatted to address many of the privations characterising parallel approaches. The ATE approach, also in practice, presents certain areas for retooling, (...) such as how it characterises levels and objects of analysis. This paper results from the work done with the TechEthos Horizon 2020 project in evaluating the ethical, legal, and social impacts of climate engineering, digital extended reality, and neurotechnologies. To meet the challenges these technology families present, this paper aims to enhance the ATE framework to encompass the variety of human processes and material forms, functions, and applications that comprise the socio-technical systems in which these technologies are embedded. (shrink)

Some types of solar radiation management (SRM) research are ethically problematic because they expose persons, animals, and ecosystems to significant risks. In our earlier work, we argued for ethical norms for SRM research based on norms for biomedical research. Biomedical researchers may not conduct research on persons without their consent, but universal consent is impractical for SRM research. We argue that instead of requiring universal consent, ethical norms for SRM research require only political legitimacy in decision-making about global SRM trials. (...) Using Allen Buchanan & Robert Keohane's model of global political legitimacy, we examine several existing global institutions as possible analogues for a politically legitimate SRM decision-making body. (shrink)

In ethical reflections on new technologies, a specific type of argument often pops up, which criticizes scientists for “playing God” with these new technological possibilities. The first part of this article is an examination of how these arguments have been interpreted in the literature. Subsequently, this article aims to reinterpret these arguments as symbolic arguments: they are grounded not so much in a set of ontological or empirical claims, but concern symbolic classificatory schemes that ground our value judgments in the (...) first place. Invoking symbolic arguments thus refers to how certain new technologies risk undermining our fundamental symbolic distinctions by which we organize and evaluate our interactions with the world and in society. Such symbolic distinctions, moreover, tend to be resilient against logical argumentation, mainly because they themselves form the basis on which we argue in the cultural and ethical sphere in the first place. Therefore, effective strategies to evaluate and counter these arguments require another approach, showing that these technologies either do not challenge these classifications or, if they do, how they can be accompanied by the proper actions to integrate these technologies into our society. (shrink)

This paper puts forward two claims about funding carbon capture and storage. The first claim is that there are moral justifications supporting strategic investment into CO2 storage from global and regional perspectives. One argument draws on the empirical evidence which suggests carbon capture and storage would play a significant role in a portfolio of global solutions to climate change; the other draws on Rawls' notion of legitimate expectations and Moellendorf's Anti-Poverty principle. The second claim is that where to pursue (...) this strategic investment poses a morally non-trivial problem, with considerations like near-term global distributive justice and undermining legitimate expectations favouring investing in developing regions, especially in Asia, and considerations like long-term climate impacts and best uses of resources favouring investing in the relatively wealthy regions that have the best prospects for successful storage development. [Open access]. (shrink)

‘Terraforming’ is hypothetical climatic and geo-physical engineering of other planets on a grand scale, with the aim of turning the so-called ‘barren’ planets in our (or for that matter another) solar system into habitable earth-like eco-systems. Although terraforming sounds like an idea from science fiction (where it indeed has appeared), it has been seriously proposed as a future project for the human race. With such a technology we could colonise the solar system and perhaps eventually others, moulding them in (...) an image of our own making. In this chapter I consider the ethics of terraforming through the lens of an ‘agent-based’ virtue ethics. I argue that advocacy of - and any attempt at - terraforming is likely to demonstrate two significant character flaws in agents: an insensitivity to beauty; and, hubris, an excessive pride or faith in our own abilities in the course of transcending the proper limits of human activities. (shrink)

Highlights: -/- • Breastfeeding and breastfeeding support can contribute to mitigating climate change. • Achieving global nutrition targets will save more emissions than fuel-switching. • Breastfeeding support programmes support a just transition. • This work can support the expansion of mitigation options in energy system models. -/- Abstract: -/- Renewable gas has been proposed as a solution to decarbonise industrial processes, specifically heat demand. As part of this effort, the breast-milk substitutes industry is proposing to use renewable gas as (...) a substitute for fossil natural gas. However, decarbonising the industrial processing of breast-milk substitutes can increase social license for these products, potentially undermining breastfeeding. World Health Organisation nutrition targets aim to increase exclusive breastfeeding to at least 50% globally by 2025 to improve maternal, infant, and young child health and nutrition. This target will have implications for the energy transition. A weakness of existing energy models is that demands for end-use products such as breast-milk substitutes are typically not considered explicitly. This paper develops an analytical framework for explicitly representing infant feeding methods in energy systems models. We compare the emissions saved in Ireland from decarbonising the industrial processing of breast-milk substitutes with renewable gas with the emissions saved by an increase in exclusive breastfeeding to 50% in both Ireland and a key export market, China. We demonstrate that the emissions saved from achieving the minimum global breastfeeding target are greater than when renewable gas is used to displace natural gas in the production of breast-milk substitutes in Ireland. We discuss the decarbonisation of breast-milk substitutes in relation to the principle of justice as non-maleficence, a principle based on the commitment to avoid harm, a novel application of a principle of justice. We conclude that breastfeeding support can be considered a demand-side measure for mitigating climate change by reducing the demand for energy services to produce breast-milk substitutes. A key recommendation is to position breastfeeding support as both a public health and a climate justice issue that is relevant for a just transition. The framework developed for this paper could be applied to support the inclusion of a wider range of mitigation options with social justice outcomes in energy system models. [Open access]. (shrink)

The World’s Leading Research and Development Institutions and Companies -/- Introduction -/- Research and Development (R&D) is the backbone of global innovation, driving technological progress, economic growth, and scientific discoveries. Across the world, top institutions and corporations invest billions of dollars into R&D to push the boundaries of human knowledge and create groundbreaking technologies. This essay explores the most influential research institutions and companies shaping the future through their contributions in science, engineering, medicine, and technology. -/- The Role of (...) Research Institutions in Global Innovation -/- Research institutions play a crucial role in advancing fundamental and applied sciences. Many of these institutions are publicly funded universities and government research agencies that focus on a wide range of disciplines, from medicine and engineering to artificial intelligence and space exploration. -/- 1. Leading Research Institutions -/- Some of the most prestigious research institutions include: -/- National Institutes of Health (NIH) – USA: The primary agency of the U.S. government responsible for biomedical and public health research. -/- National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) – USA: A global leader in aerospace and space exploration, NASA continues to innovate in space technology and planetary science. -/- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) – France: The largest governmental research organization in France, covering all scientific disciplines. -/- Max Planck Society – Germany: A network of research institutes in Germany, known for excellence in science and technology. -/- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) – China: China’s premier research institution focuses on science and technology innovation across various fields. -/- Harvard University – USA: Leads in biomedical research, social sciences, and humanities. -/- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) – USA: At the forefront of engineering, robotics, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing research. -/- Stanford University – USA: Known for its deep ties to Silicon Valley, Stanford plays a key role in tech innovation. -/- University of Oxford & University of Cambridge – UK: Both institutions are among the oldest and most respected in the world, conducting high-impact research in medicine, engineering, and the humanities. -/- Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETH Zurich) – Switzerland: Excels in engineering and natural sciences research. -/- University of Tokyo – Japan: Japan’s leading university, known for its research in science and technology. -/- California Institute of Technology (Caltech) – USA: A leader in space science and physics. -/- Imperial College London – UK: Specializes in engineering, medical, and business research. -/- University of Toronto – Canada: A top institution in AI, robotics, and engineering. -/- 2. Engineering and Technology Research Leaders -/- Engineering research institutions contribute to infrastructure, automation, and digital transformation. Some of the most prominent ones include: -/- University of California, Berkeley – USA: Known for its research in engineering, computer science, and environmental science. -/- University of Pennsylvania – USA: Invests in innovative engineering projects. -/- University of Michigan – USA: Known for technological advancements in multiple fields. -/- Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL) – Switzerland: Excels in engineering and digital research. -/- Tsinghua University – China: A leader in AI, renewable energy, and industrial automation research. -/- The Role of Private Companies in Research and Development -/- Private corporations play a major role in R&D, investing heavily in emerging technologies, pharmaceuticals, consumer electronics, and industrial innovations. Many of the world’s biggest companies spend billions to maintain leadership in their respective fields. -/- 1. Leading Technology Companies in R&D -/- Amazon ($73.2B in R&D spending, 2022): Focuses on cloud computing, AI, logistics, and automation. -/- Alphabet (Google) ($39.5B in R&D, 2022): Invests in AI, quantum computing, and search algorithms. -/- Meta (Facebook) ($35.3B in R&D, 2022): Focuses on AI, VR, and the Metaverse. -/- Apple ($27.7B in R&D, 2022): Leads in consumer electronics and semiconductor technology. -/- Microsoft ($26.6B in R&D, 2022): Invests in AI, cloud computing, and software innovation. -/- 2. Engineering and Industrial Companies in R&D -/- Volkswagen ($19.88B in R&D, 2022): A leader in automotive engineering and electric vehicles. -/- Samsung ($19.29B in R&D, 2022): Develops advanced semiconductors and electronics. -/- Intel ($17.53B in R&D, 2022): Focuses on microprocessors and AI hardware. -/- Huawei ($24B in R&D, 2022): Leads in telecommunications and 5G development. -/- Siemens – Germany: A global leader in industrial automation, medical technology, and smart infrastructure. -/- Nokia – Finland: Focuses on telecommunications infrastructure and technology development. -/- Sony – Japan: Invests in consumer electronics, gaming, and entertainment technologies. -/- Boeing – USA: Develops aerospace technology, defense systems, and commercial aircraft innovations. -/- General Electric (GE) – USA: Focuses on energy, aviation, and industrial automation R&D. -/- 3. Pharmaceutical and Biotech Research Leaders -/- Roche ($14.72B in R&D, 2022): A leading pharmaceutical company specializing in diagnostics and biotech innovations. -/- Pfizer: Known for vaccine development, including the COVID-19 vaccine. -/- Moderna: A pioneer in mRNA technology for medical treatments. -/- Johnson & Johnson: Invests heavily in medical devices and pharmaceuticals. -/- Bristol-Myers Squibb – USA: Focuses on biopharmaceutical research, including immunology and oncology. -/- AstraZeneca – UK/Sweden: Invests in pharmaceutical research, particularly in oncology and cardiovascular diseases. -/- The Impact of R&D on Society and the Future -/- The advancements driven by R&D have a profound impact on global society. Some of the most significant areas of innovation include: -/- Healthcare: Research in biotechnology, gene therapy, and medical AI is revolutionizing healthcare, leading to personalized medicine and new treatments for previously incurable diseases. -/- Artificial Intelligence: AI research in institutions and companies is driving automation, machine learning, and deep learning applications. -/- Sustainable Energy: Engineering research is focusing on renewable energy, electric vehicles, and smart grid technologies to combat climate change. -/- Space Exploration: Organizations like NASA, SpaceX, and ESA are expanding human exploration beyond Earth. -/- Telecommunications: Companies like Huawei, Nokia, and Qualcomm are leading the development of 5G and future wireless communication technologies. -/- Automotive Industry: Electric vehicles, hydrogen fuel cells, and autonomous driving are key research areas for companies like Tesla, Volkswagen, and Toyota. -/- Conclusion -/- The world’s leading R&D institutions and companies are shaping the future through their groundbreaking work in science, engineering, medicine, and technology. Universities and research centers provide the foundation for discovery, while corporations drive commercial applications of these innovations. As investments in R&D continue to grow, humanity will witness even greater advancements in fields such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and space exploration, ultimately improving lives and pushing the boundaries of what is possible. -/- . (shrink)

Chaos, Free Will, and the Law of Balance in Nature: The Evolution of Human Consciousness as the Universe’s Absolute Balancing Mechanism -/- Chaos exists in both organic and non-organic matter, but the way it manifests and is regulated differs significantly. Organic systems—such as living organisms, ecosystems, and human societies—have built-in feedback mechanisms that allow them to self-regulate and maintain balance. Non-organic systems, on the other hand, follow deterministic laws and require external forces to restore equilibrium. Angelito Malicse’s universal formula, particularly (...) the law of balance in nature, provides a structured way to understand and manage chaos. However, the key to fully applying this formula lies in the evolution of human consciousness and its role as the absolute balancing mechanism of the universe. -/- This essay explores the role of chaos in organic and non-organic matter, the importance of higher intelligence in correcting imbalances, and how the evolution of human consciousness enables it to perceive, understand, and actively maintain universal balance. -/- 1. Chaos in Organic Matter: The Self-Regulating System -/- Chaos in organic matter does not mean disorder—it follows the law of balance because living organisms and social structures have adaptive mechanisms to restore stability. Biological systems, for example, appear chaotic but maintain equilibrium through feedback loops. The human body regulates temperature, blood sugar, and heart rate despite constant external and internal fluctuations. Similarly, ecosystems face unpredictable events—weather changes, species migration, and natural disasters—but they self-adjust over time to sustain life. -/- In human society, chaos often manifests through economic downturns, political conflicts, and social unrest. However, if leaders and individuals understand and apply the law of balance, stability can be restored without artificial force. The conscious mind also exhibits chaotic tendencies—thoughts, emotions, and decisions fluctuate unpredictably. Yet, through education and awareness, the mind can be trained to make rational, balanced decisions that align with natural laws rather than false beliefs or propaganda. -/- The higher Intelligence of human beings plays a crucial role in ensuring this balance. Unlike lower forms of organic life, humans possess advanced reasoning, problem-solving abilities, and the capacity for long-term planning. This makes them the primary regulators of chaos—not just within their own biological and social systems but also in the non-organic world that lacks self-regulation. -/- 2. Chaos in Non-Organic Matter: The Deterministic System -/- Unlike organic systems, non-organic matter does not self-regulate—it follows strict physical laws, and chaos in these systems leads to increasing disorder unless acted upon by external forces. A storm, for example, forms due to differences in temperature and pressure but does not correct itself; it dissipates only when external conditions stabilize. A malfunctioning machine will not fix itself unless a human or AI intervenes. Economic crises caused by unchecked greed and corruption continue until governments regulate financial imbalances. -/- The only force capable of correcting chaos in non-organic matter is higher intelligence—specifically, human intelligence. Throughout history, human beings have acted as external regulators to restore order in chaotic non-organic systems. For example: ✔ Engineering and technology help control natural forces—dams regulate rivers, satellites predict weather, and medicine counteracts disease. ✔ Governance and laws prevent economic collapse, crime, and war by ensuring that human behavior aligns with sustainable balance. ✔ Environmental conservation corrects imbalances caused by industrialization and pollution, restoring ecosystems to a stable state. -/- The key takeaway from Malicse’s universal formula is that while organic systems can self-adjust, non-organic systems must be externally balanced to prevent collapse. Leaders and decision-makers must recognize when a system needs external correction to prevent unnecessary destruction. -/- However, the misuse of intelligence can also create more chaos instead of balance. When human decisions are driven by ignorance, greed, or false beliefs, they destabilize both organic and non-organic systems. This is why free will must be aligned with the universal law of balance—otherwise, intelligence becomes destructive rather than corrective. -/- 3. The Evolution of Human Consciousness as the Absolute Balancing Mechanism -/- The ability of humans to regulate chaos in both organic and non-organic systems is not accidental—it is the result of the evolution of human consciousness. Unlike lower life forms that operate purely on instinct, human consciousness has expanded to perceive, understand, and control the forces of nature. -/- This evolution can be seen in: ✔ The rise of scientific understanding, where humans learned to decode the natural laws governing both organic and inorganic systems. ✔ The development of ethical and moral reasoning, allowing societies to correct imbalances caused by selfish or destructive behaviors. ✔ The pursuit of wisdom, where human intelligence moves beyond mere survival and actively seeks universal harmony. -/- At its highest stage of evolution, human consciousness becomes the absolute balancing mechanism of the universe. This means that humanity’s ultimate role is not merely to exist but to actively maintain and restore equilibrium across all systems—from biology to technology, from economics to planetary ecosystems. -/- If human intelligence continues to evolve in alignment with the universal law of balance, it will become the guiding force that corrects all chaos—ensuring that free will, governance, and even artificial intelligence function in harmony with natural equilibrium. -/- 4. Implementing the Universal Formula in Education and Governance -/- To correct the current global imbalance, Malicse’s universal formula must be integrated into the educational system. Schools must teach: ✔ The law of balance in nature, helping students understand that all decisions must align with natural laws to prevent chaos. ✔ Critical thinking, ensuring individuals can differentiate between truth, false beliefs, and misinformation. ✔ Holistic governance, training future leaders to manage societies based on natural balance rather than short-term personal gains. -/- Governments, too, must shift from short-term, economically driven policies to long-term, balance-driven policies. Policies should function like biological feedback mechanisms, continuously adjusting to maintain equilibrium. Economic regulations must prevent extreme wealth inequality, environmental policies must preserve natural ecosystems, and social structures must ensure stability without suppressing free will. -/- 5. The Role of AGI in Maintaining Natural Balance -/- A key application of Malicse’s universal formula is in the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI). If AGI is programmed with the law of balance, it can serve as an external regulatory force in areas where non-organic chaos occurs. AGI can: ✔ Monitor and predict economic imbalances, preventing market crashes. ✔ Analyze environmental changes, providing solutions to climate instability. ✔ Detect political instability, offering governance solutions based on natural balance rather than human bias. -/- However, AGI must be guided by evolved human intelligence to ensure it follows natural balance rather than becoming a tool for artificial control. Without this, AGI risks enforcing rigid, unnatural systems that disrupt organic balance rather than restore it. -/- 6. Conclusion: The Universal Formula as the Only Correct Solution -/- Malicse’s universal formula provides the only exact solution to the problem of chaos in both organic and non-organic systems. It highlights that: ✔ Organic systems self-regulate, but only if free will follows natural balance. ✔ Non-organic systems require external regulation, and only higher intelligence (humans) can provide this. ✔ The evolution of human consciousness is the key to balancing all systems, allowing humans to act as the absolute balancing force of the universe. ✔ Education, governance, and AGI must be designed to maintain balance, ensuring stability without suppressing free will. -/- If humanity fails to adopt this approach, chaos will continue to escalate, leading to further suffering, societal collapse, and environmental destruction. The only path forward is to fully integrate the universal formula into all aspects of education, governance, and artificial intelligence. -/- The time to act Is now. -/- . (shrink)

As cities confront the escalating impacts of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss, a growing body of research is calling for a reimagining of urban design through blue-green infrastructure (BGI)—integrated systems such as green roofs, rain gardens, and stormwater ponds that merge natural and engineered elements to deliver both environmental and social benefits.

Digital Twins are conceptualised in the academic technical discourse as real-time realistic digital representations of physical entities. Originating from product engineering, the Digital Twin quickly advanced into other fields, including the life sciences and earth sciences. Digital Twins are seen by the tech sector as the new promising tool for efficiency and optimisation, while governmental agencies see it as a fruitful means for improving decision-making to meet sustainability goals. A striking example of the latter is the European Commission who (...) wishes to delegate a significant role to Digital Twins in addressing climate change and supporting Green Deal policy. As Digital Twins give rise to high expectations, ambitions, and are being entrusted important societal roles, it is crucial to critically reflect on the nature of Digital Twins. In this article, we therefore philosophically reflect on Digital Twins by critically analysing dominant conceptualisations, the assumptions underlying them, and their normative implications. We dissect the concept and argue that a Digital Twin does not merely fulfil the role of being a representation, but is in fact a steering technique used to direct a physical entity towards certain goals by means of multiple representations. Currently, this steering seems mainly fuelled by a reductionist approach focused on efficiency and optimisation. However, this is not the only direction from which a Digital Twin can be thought and, consequently, designed and deployed. We therefore set an agenda based on a critical understanding of Digital Twins that helps to draw out their beneficial potential, while addressing their potential issues. (shrink)

It is commonly assumed that personalization technologies used by Google for the purpose of tailoring search results for individual users create filter bubbles, which reinforce users’ political views. Surprisingly, empirical evidence for a personalization-induced filter bubble has not been forthcoming. Here, we investigate whether filter bubbles may result instead from a searcher’s choice of search queries. In the first experiment, participants rated the left-right leaning of 48 queries (search strings), 6 for each of 8 topics (abortion, benefits, climate change, (...) sex equality, immigration, nuclear family, Islam, and taxation). An independent sample of participants were then asked to select one of these queries for each of the 8 topics. With the exception of the topic of Islam, participants were significantly more likely to select a query corresponding to their own political leaning, compared to other queries, explaining between 12% and 39% of the variance. A second experiment investigated the effect of the political leaning of the same queries on the overall political leaning of Search Engine Result Pages (SERPs) in Google Search. The top six results of each SERP were rated collectively by a third group of participants, explaining 36.3% of the variance across all 48 search terms (p < .00001). That is, (1) participants in our experiments tended to select own-side search queries, and (2) using those queries tended to yield own-side search results when using the Google search engine. Our results are consistent with the notion of a self-imposed filter bubble in which query selection plays a salient role. (shrink)

America and the world are in the process of collapse from excessive population growth, most of it for the last century, and now all of it, due to 3rd world people. Consumption of resources and the addition of 4 billion more ca. 2100 will collapse industrial civilization and bring about starvation, disease, violence and war on a staggering scale. The earth loses about 2% of its topsoil every year, so as it nears 2100, most of its food growing capacity will (...) be gone. Billions will die and nuclear war is all but certain. In America, this is being hugely accelerated by massive immigration and immigrant reproduction, combined with abuses made possible by democracy. Depraved human nature inexorably turns the dream of democracy and diversity into a nightmare of crime and poverty. China will continue to overwhelm America and the world, as long as it maintains the dictatorship which limits selfishness. The root cause of collapse is the inability of our innate psychology to adapt to the modern world, which leads people to treat unrelated persons as though they had common interests. The idea of human rights is an evil fantasy promoted by leftists to draw attention away from the merciless destruction of the earth by unrestrained 3rd world motherhood. This, plus ignorance of basic biology and psychology, leads to the social engineering delusions of the partially educated who control democratic societies. Few understand that if you help one person you harm someone else—there is no free lunch and every single item anyone consumes destroys the earth beyond repair. Consequently, social policies everywhere are unsustainable and one by one all societies without stringent controls on selfishness will collapse into anarchy or dictatorship. The most basic facts, almost never mentioned, are that there are not enough resources in America or the world to lift a significant percentage of the poor out of poverty and keep them there. The attempt to do this is bankrupting America and destroying the world. The earth’s capacity to produce food decreases daily, as does our genetic quality. And now, as always, by far the greatest enemy of the poor is other poor and not the rich. Without dramatic and immediate changes, there is no hope for preventing the collapse of America, or any country that follows a democratic system. -/- Those interested in all my writings in their most recent versions may download from this site my e-book ‘Philosophy, Human Nature and the Collapse of Civilization Michael Starks (2016)- Articles and Reviews 2006-2016’ by Michael Starks First Ed. 662p (2016). -/- All of my papers and books have now been published in revised versions both in ebooks and in printed books. -/- Talking Monkeys: Philosophy, Psychology, Science, Religion and Politics on a Doomed Planet - Articles and Reviews 2006-2017 (2017) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071HVC7YP. -/- The Logical Structure of Philosophy, Psychology, Mind and Language in Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Searle--Articles and Reviews 2006-2016 (2017) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071P1RP1B. -/- Suicidal Utopian Delusions in the 21st century: Philosophy, Human Nature and the Collapse of Civilization - Articles and Reviews 2006-2017 (2017) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0711R5LGX . (shrink)

Collected and edited by Noah Levin -/- Table of Contents: -/- UNIT ONE: INTRODUCTION TO CONTEMPORARY ETHICS: TECHNOLOGY, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, AND IMMIGRATION 1 The “Trolley Problem” and Self-Driving Cars: Your Car’s Moral Settings (Noah Levin) 2 What is Ethics and What Makes Something a Problem for Morality? (David Svolba) 3 Letter from the Birmingham City Jail (Martin Luther King, Jr) 4 A Defense of Affirmative Action (Noah Levin) 5 The Moral Issues of Immigration (B.M. Wooldridge) 6 The Ethics of our (...) Digital Selves (Noah Levin) -/- UNIT TWO: TORTURE, DEATH, AND THE “GREATER GOOD” 7 The Ethics of Torture (Martine Berenpas) 8 What Moral Obligations do we have (or not have) to Impoverished Peoples? (B.M. Wooldridge) 9 Euthanasia, or Mercy Killing (Nathan Nobis) 10 An Argument Against Capital Punishment (Noah Levin) 11 Common Arguments about Abortion (Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob) 12 Better (Philosophical) Arguments about Abortion (Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob) -/- UNIT THREE: PERSONS, AUTONOMY, THE ENVIRONMENT, AND RIGHTS 13 Animal Rights (Eduardo Salazar) 14 John Rawls and the “Veil of Ignorance” (Ben Davies) 15 Environmental Ethics: Climate Change (Jonathan Spelman) 16 Rape, Date Rape, and the “Affirmative Consent” Law in California (Noah Levin) 17 The Ethics of Pornography: Deliberating on a Modern Harm (Eduardo Salazar) 18 The Social Contract (Thomas Hobbes) -/- UNIT FOUR: HAPPINESS 19 Is Pleasure all that Matters? Thoughts on the “Experience Machine” (Prabhpal Singh) 20 Utilitarianism (J.S. Mill) 21 Utilitarianism: Pros and Cons (B.M. Wooldridge) 22 Existentialism, Genetic Engineering, and the Meaning of Life: The Fifths (Noah Levin) 23 The Solitude of the Self (Elizabeth Cady Stanton) 24 Game Theory, the Nash Equilibrium, and the Prisoner’s Dilemma (Douglas E. Hill) -/- UNIT FIVE: RELIGION, LAW, AND ABSOLUTE MORALITY 25 The Myth of Gyges and The Crito (Plato) 26 God, Morality, and Religion (Kristin Seemuth Whaley) 27 The Categorical Imperative (Immanuel Kant) 28 The Virtues (Aristotle) 29 Beyond Good and Evil (Friedrich Nietzsche) 30 Other Moral Theories: Subjectivism, Relativism, Emotivism, Intuitionism, etc. (Jan F. Jacko). (shrink)

Urban areas are increasingly facing challenges such as rapid population growth, environmental degradation, and climate change, necessitating innovative solutions for sustainable development. This paper explores the role of cloud-based artificial intelligence (AI) in promoting blue-green solutions that integrate natural and engineered systems to enhance urban resilience. By leveraging cloud computing, urban planners and decision-makers can analyze vast datasets, simulate environmental scenarios, and optimize resource management. The study highlights successful case studies where AI-driven blue-green interventions have improved water management, enhanced (...) green spaces, and mitigated urban heat effects. Furthermore, it discusses the collaborative potential of cloud AI in fostering stakeholder engagement and participatory governance. The findings suggest that adopting cloud AI-powered blue-green solutions is crucial for addressing urban development challenges and promoting sustainable, livable cities. (shrink)

America and the world are in the process of collapse from excessive population growth, most of it for the last century, and now all of it, due to 3rd world people. Consumption of resources and the addition of 4 billion more ca. 2100 will collapse industrial civilization and bring about starvation, disease, violence and war on a staggering scale. The earth loses at least 1% of its topsoil every year, so as it nears 2100, most of its food growing capacity (...) will be gone. Billions will die and nuclear war is all but certain. In America, this is being hugely accelerated by massive immigration and immigrant reproduction, combined with abuses made possible by democracy. Depraved human nature inexorably turns the dream of democracy and diversity into a nightmare of crime and poverty. China will continue to overwhelm America and the world, as long as it maintains the dictatorship which limits selfishness. The root cause of collapse is the inability of our innate psychology to adapt to the modern world, which leads people to treat unrelated persons as though they had common interests. The idea of human rights is an evil fantasy promoted by leftists to draw attention away from the merciless destruction of the earth by unrestrained 3rd world motherhood. This, plus ignorance of basic biology and psychology, leads to the social engineering delusions of the partially educated who control democratic societies. Few understand that if you help one person you harm someone else—there is no free lunch and every single item anyone consumes destroys the earth beyond repair. Consequently, social policies everywhere are unsustainable and one by one all societies without stringent controls on selfishness will collapse into anarchy or dictatorship. The most basic facts, almost never mentioned, are that there are not enough resources in America or the world to lift a significant percentage of the poor out of poverty and keep them there. The attempt to do this is bankrupting America and destroying the world. The earth’s capacity to produce food decreases daily, as does our genetic quality. And now, as always, by far the greatest enemy of the poor is other poor and not the rich. Without dramatic and immediate changes, there is no hope for preventing the collapse of America, or any country that follows a democratic system. (shrink)

Synthetic foods advocates offer the promise of efficient, reliable, and sustainable food production. Engineered organisms become factories to produce food. Proponents claim that through this technique important barriers can be eliminated which would facilitate the production of traditional foods outside their climatic range. This technique would allow reducing food miles, secure future supply, and maintain quality and taste expectations. In this paper, we examine coffee production via biobased means. A startup called Atomo Coffee aims to produce synthetic coffee with the (...) aim of saving ‘the taste of coffee’ from the effects of climate change. This decontextualisation of coffee production ignores the current and historical contributions of coffee farmers in two ways: the traditional varieties in taste of coffee and their cultural significance, and the potential shade-grown coffee plantations have in capturing carbon. In addition, synthetic coffee may lead to the loss of agricultural biodiversity and the removal of resources away from production systems that provide a safe space for tropical flora and fauna. How should the ‘taste of coffee’ be owned? We investigate the property regimes under which we could consider owning the taste of coffee as a ‘synthetic’ agrobiodiversity to help identify rights and responsibilities. Building on this analysis, we consider dimensions of responsible innovation and social justice to help guide synthetic foods as an agricultural innovation. (shrink)

Humans face wide ranging and global challenges in the Anthropocene, the most prominent of which is anthropogenic climate change. One initial pivot towards sustainability, particularly in my home country of the United States, has been to rely heavily on technological innovation powered most obviously by engineers. Using the climate activist Greta Thunberg's speech at the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference as my inspiration, I try to show how some of the technology based solutions only entrench what (...) I call the “Bestance” mentality, that is, the fundamental stance or orientation toward the natural world in the Anthropocene wherein all entities show up as mere resources. Upon showing the various ways in which traditional ethical approaches and environmental philosophical approaches have proved unhelpful in navigating the challenges of the Anthropocene, I try to demonstrate and how a Heideggerian ecophenomenological approach can help us not only understand how the world appears to many of us in the Anthropocene, but also what a more graceful way of being might look like in Heidegger's concept of “dwelling.” Using specific examples of current technologies pervasively normalized in the United States, including hydraulic fracturing, horizontal drilling, desalination, and artificial nitrogen based fertilization, I use Heidegger's philosophical concepts to show how the land, sea, and air can show up as Bestand in the Anthropocene, that is, merely materials on hand to be manipulated in order to serve human interests. (shrink)