Alex Bokhart 's Argument : Argument

1971 Words Dec 19th, 2016 8 Pages
Alex Bokhart’s Argument: Refuting Jamieson’s Argument

Jamieson argues that climate change is inevitable and I could not agree more. This element of his claim-making is in both his argument, as well as the Federal Republic of Germanys very sound. Throughout the evidence or the descriptive analysis of how things are we all, for the most part, can agree that climate change is now an eternally inevitable issue that we as humans must deal with. It is the particular explanatory element within Jamieson’s argument that I do not agree with. For Jamieson believes that “why things are how they are” is because of human’s inability to grasp the concept of climate changes scale and visibility within the current world, as well as humans are not “good at thinking” (Jamieson, 102-103). However, it is not the fact that humans cannot comprehend issues that occur on such long time scales, nor the fact that we are not good at thinking for just look at our history. We have determined the rotation of the earth, of why we have glacial and inter-glacial periods. We have discovered the movements of our continents over the past thousands of years and have discovered galaxies. In addition, we have invented so many things that we have never seen nor been able to imagine before. Thus, I do not agree that we cannot comprehend things on such long time scales, we cannot comprehend what we do not see and are not good at “thinking”. That I believe is a huge flaw in the essential building blocks of his…

More about Alex Bokhart 's Argument : Argument

Open Document