Running head: ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS DISCUSSION 1 Make the world Greta again: The speaker's point of view in this video is, the government only cares about money and not the future of these students and what the year 2030 looks like for them. I believe this is a biased view because it is hard to say, if she had a lot of money would she buy a plane, fancy car, or a big house? She speaks about how everyone wants to be famous and have all those nice things and she states "we can not think like that". By Greta saying that it implies that those thoughts of consumerism further the decline of the climate. The issues at hand are economic inequality, discrimination, and individualism. I say economic inequality because the rich become richer through furthering the decline of the climate. For example, deforestation companies killing hundreds of thousands of trees needed to remove the carbon from our air to make more money to build more with wood. Without the funds that the government or that of a rich person, Greta is not able to reach the ears of these politicians by any means. Discrimination affects Greta because she is seen as an uneducated child who skips school to cause a disruption in politics. Greta and the members of the other climate control groups seek to be seen and heard to make a change for their futures. Individualism implies that the politicians do not value the climate and have their minds set on ideals that are only of intrinsic value to themselves without regard to the climate. The environmental issues do have implications in regards to morals. The environmental decline is due to the fact people act on their own free will. By doing so it is starting to ruin the environment. An individual is entitled to do what they want as long as it does not harm others in which case it will involve the law. However, this is a very grey area, it can be seen as harmless for a person to take their boat out and fish which would not be harming anyone directly. Contrasting to that, in Greta's eyes that would be harming the future generation. So would you say harming people in the future implicates that person fishing on their boat who takes fish from the ocean and creates more pollution? Should the law not be involved even if it is inflicting harm to the future population? I agree with her point of view, most people only see the "fancy" things in life that make our lives easier, taste better, or require less effort. Greta disagrees with this mindset and infers that it is the root cause of the problem. I think that if we all stopped wanting things just because they look nice or give us a certain social status we could see a drastic improvement in the climate. Big companies shovel ads in the faces of targeted age, religious, and social groups to further their profits. If we stopped holding an intrinsic value to things we want and prioritize things we need we can all help the environment. Although, from what we have learned in these modules it is difficult if not ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS DISCUSSION impossible to change a person's ideas and beliefs especially on a global scale without stripping away a person's right to their own free will. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS DISCUSSION 3 Environmental Ethics In his video, “Why I Don’t Care About ‘Climate Change,’” David Saddington wants people to think about the effects of climate change in our daily lives, and not just in terms of its science. Contrary to popular belief, he believes that climate change impacts all, regardless of where they live or their socioeconomic status, because we are all interconnected. The speaker is not biased in any way. Although living in a rich country like the United Kingdom, he has first-hand experience with the harmful effects of climate change. He also discussed how climate change is harming food production worldwide and how terrorist groups in other nations are using it as a weapon. According to the speaker, everyone has a responsibility to address climate change. We regard combating climate change as a greater goal, but we are not willing to adjust our lifestyles or economic practices that harm the environment. Humans are the most environmentally harmful of all animals on the planet. Because our life and activities have had the greatest impact on our world, we should be morally and ethically bound to take action to improve it. Because of the expected rapid population rise in the future, our influence on the world will significantly increase due to our increased numbers and actions that hurt the ecosystem. We are the species most accountable for the environment's preservation, given our impact on it. We agree with the speaker that climate change impacts everyone, regardless of where they live, but we cannot agree that we should dismiss its science entirely. Science plays a vital role in describing the many effects of climate change. Also, scientific knowledge is critical because it allows decision-makers to view climate change in the context of other major global concerns. It would be a mistake to disregard science as a method of addressing climate change.
Purchase answer to see full attachment