ๆป ๅซๅงไน็ตๅๆ็ผ
Eight years ago, I recorded a piece of music titled ๆป
ๅซๅงไน็ตๅๆ็ผ, which roughly translates as โfinally achieving clear vision, just when the era/kalpa of destruction is beginningโ. Its underlying idea is a juxtaposition of despair, sadness, and resignation due to a realization of very dark times ahead with elation due to a sudden discovery or great insight (which, given the circumstances, will probably be entirely useless). It switches back and forth between these two moods (but not very often as the piece is very slow). rayosu ยท ๅนปๅคไฝไบ โ ๆป
ๅซๅงไน็ตๅๆ็ผ a note about the music ๆป
ๅซๅงไน็ตๅๆ็ผ (2018) is one of...
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Climate Policy, and the Parasite Class
In a paper published in Philosophical Issues in 2001, David Schmidtz argued for an approach to environmental ethics โ climate change in particular โ based on Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA). Iโm not at all convinced that CBA is an appropriate and/or useful tool to understand the ethics of the climate crisis, however, and quite recently, Jeppe von Platz raised serious doubts about the possibility of making the necessary calculations to apply CBA. Nevertheless, I do think that CBA is a useful tool to understand the policy situation. When the topic is the ethics of climate change it makes sense to apply...
Carbon-neutrality is dead.
So, now what?
After carbon-neutrality was declared an official goal in the 2015 Paris Agreement it became fashionable for governments and corporations to declare their intention to become carbon neutral by 2050 or soon thereafter. This was never more than an empty promise, however. The deadline was set far enough in the future to make immediate action unnecessary and few if any governments or corporations ever accepted a realistic plan to actually achieve carbon-neutrality. A decade later, they have largely given up pretense. Some have officially given up the goal; others have silently voided or discarded it. Of course, carbon-neutrality by 2050 was...
(Not) Too Late for What?
Some people seem to believe that it is too late to fight climate change. Others seem to believe that this kind of fatalism is as dangerous as climate change denialism (because both effectively advocate not doing anything). Itโs hardly a secret that Iโm rather pessimistic about climate change and its effects โ just have a look at what Iโve written about the topic before โ but that doesnโt mean that I think that it is โtoo lateโ to fight climate change. Rather, I think that the notion of it being โtoo lateโ (or not) in this context is nonsensical. The...
The Ethics of Climate Insurgency
(This is part 5 in the No Time for Utopia series.) Letโs say that you want to avoid the Mad-Maxian hell of societal collapse that climate change is making increasing likely, then how can and should you try to do that? Youโd have an incredibly powerful and well-connected enemy, and just asking them to give up their short-term profits in order to save the planet isnโt likely to have any effect โ at least, it hasnโt had any effect thus far. Then what? Very many different answers can be given to that last question, but I want to focus here...