Taking Responsibility Versus Diffusing Responsibility

Global warming and climate change exist and the two have called for a world attention to reduce their impacts. The Great 8 nations, including U.S., have convened various global summits where heads of states come to debate how to counter the increased climate change. Various recommendations have been proposed to counter the effects of climate change and device ways in which the change can be accommodated. This paper will discuss the rhetorical questions asked by the author in the journal article. In addition, the paper will attempt to answer some of the questions posed by Eric Klinenberg, the author of Adaption.

An urgent issue, climate change is undoubtedly a sweeping global dilemma of paramount importance. Though most people are aware of this fact, many either choose to ignore it, or acknowledge it, but take no action against it. Those who do choose to take action usually attempt to combat climate change by using the methods that are most commonly discussed: becoming more energy efficient, recycling, and reducing emissions through using more sustainable transportation. Though these actions are helpful, they are not the most efficient way to counter climate change.

Climate change has been a subject of discussion in the media for many years, supported with the use of arguments against oil polluting the environment and extreme scare tactics of Polar ice caps flooding civilians backyards. The issue has been ignored by the majority of lay people as seeming too complicated, and with all the conflicting information in the media in the past, who can blame them? However, scientifically, climate change and what perpetrates it is fairly simple to understand and society as a whole is beginning to come to a clear consensus on climate change. Thanks in part to more readily available forms of media and information, people have become cognizant of the fact that climate change is a legitimate problem which requires immediate amelioration. While this may seem melodramatic, society is realizing that climate change is an issue which can no longer be denied if the human race wishes to continue.

The Western existence of modernization, especially technological and industrial development, economic growth, material prosperity, urbanization, and democracy, has been built upon a long line of industrial capitalism, an economic system predicated on the accelerating extraction and consumption of fossil fuels for energy (Clark & York, 2005). A major unintended consequence of the use of fossil fuels is an increase in the average temperature of the earth; known as global warming or climate change. Recognizing and responding to climate change, arguably the most challenging social problem of the modern era (Giddens, 2009), thus poses a fundamental critique of continued modernization processes around the world (Freudenburg, 2003). Climate change is a major issue that affects all life across the

Global Warming has changed American’s perspectives in many ways though-out the past centuries including: the way society views our environment, technology, cultural values, as well as expectations. According to Kerry Ferris and Jill Stein, The Real World; An Intro to Sociology; 4th Edition (pg.45), a paradigm shifts, “occur when new data force new ways of looking at the world”. In the 1950’s increased awareness was placed on global warming and the Green House Effect due to new technology showing that the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere were rising each year (Encyclopedia of Global Warming). As a result Americans were concerned with pollution for the first time in history; and in return, our cultures perspectives slowly started to change the way we look at the world.

Gary Stix calls to Americans to halt global warming. The world is changing and not for the better, he writes “The Debate on Global Warming is Over” (Stix 46). CO2 levels are higher than they have been in 650,000 years and are projected to only increase at an exponential rate. No one knows exactly when and what will happen, but all scientist can agree that it won’t be good. Making a difference in the fight against global warming will require a massive alteration in the entire world’s energy economy. Fossil Fuels account for 80% of the world’s energy and if a “carbon budget” is put into place then they will be ineffective (Stix 47). We need to begin to make a shift towards more renewable sources of energy, and adopt a system to help regulate the total amount of emissions. These programs will give us a head start on lessening the effects of global warming, but the

Climate change is one of the most controversial and ongoing topics in society today. Scientist and politicians alike all have opinions, but very often they are not in line with each other. 97% of climatologists agree that climate change is happening, as well as many of the large corporations in this field such as NASA, the Geological Society of America, and the American Association for the Advancement of science. Still, these debates take place on sites such as climatedebatedaily.com or the worldwide conference that was held on June 6, 2015 that took place 79 countries. Both sides claim to have solid evidence that supports their theories, but it is evident to most scientists and corporations alike that the human race is creating our own destruction

Michael Pollan author of “Why Bother?” (an article from The New York Times) was very clear on delivering his message on climate change. Throughout his article he uses many different sources and reasons to explain, not only what is happening, but things we should be doing to create solutions to the problems we created. Micheal directs us to think about his thoughts about how climate change is a real problem, and demonstrates with examples from other authors, consequences that we could very soon be facing, and what we can do to evade these problems that are coming our way. With the few solutions we are presented with it is unrealistic to try to solve the climate change problem we have arrived to.

Modernism represents an optimistic view of human impact on the environment that has been the dominant viewpoint for the last 200 years. The knowledge that mankind holds the ability to control the environment heavily stresses why climate change is not such a problem to worry about. One of the core beliefs of the modernistic perspective is that people have no need to fear future environmental disaster because the next technological advancement that will prevent it is right around the corner. Furthermore, those who share this view do not include themselves in their image of the ecosystem, believing they are detached from it. Lastly, a laissez-faire approach is taken to environmental problems, focusing on progression through technology, stressing that as long as progress is made in this area all problems will be fixed. For a modernist, climate change is nothing to worry about. This may be a real situation, but it will be solved with advancements in technology before one’s way of life is changed. What people should be worrying about is ensuring a laissez faire approach to the market with sponsorship to new technologies. As a result of reusable energy technology already existing, modernists believe that the problem of climate change has been solved and without disrupting free market system these technologies will be further implemented. As long as there are people given the opportunity to innovate, some will focus on and ultimately solve the concern of climate change. The issue of

Yesterday morning, I drove my father’s car to go to a store. Last night, I forgot to turn off our batahroom light. Moisés Naím’s article opened up my eyes. We really need to make an effort to reduce climate change. Its effect is costing people’s lives. According to the article, this year is the hottest on record. We felt this effect in Hawaii. Last summer was the hottest temperature I’ve experienced since coming to Hawaii. A lot of people from other countries suffered stroke due to the hot weather. In order to counteract climate change, we need a

Diffusion of responsibility is a social theory that proves the probability of a person’s instinct to help an individual in distress is less likely. As a matter of fact, diffusion of responsibility goes hand in hand with the by standard effect; an in depth social stigma that shows the greater number of people present, the less likely people are willing to assist a distressed individual. The reason why people are quick to discard those in distress is because of the lacked sensation of interference, and since there are other out lookers within the premise, a misconception of “help on the way” is construed.

This article critically examines the ways in which individuals could help reduce the impacts of global warming. The author challenges that every individual could significantly minimise the effects of global warming by adopting to a more responsible lifestyle.

White’s thesis in The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis states that in order to confront the expanding environmental crises, humans must begin to analyze and alter their treatment and attitudes towards nature. The slow destruction of the environment derives from the Western scientific and technological advancements made since the Medieval time period. “What people do about their ecology depends on what they think about themselves in relation to things around them” (RON p.7). Technology and science alone will not be able to save humans until we adjust the way of thinking and suppress the old ideas of humans power above nature. Instead, we need to learn how to think of ourselves as being

The decline of the environment due to natural and human exertion is known as the degradation of the environment. The natural weather occurrences such as heavy rain, flooding, storms, earthquakes, volcanoes etc. are not administered under human control. These meteorological phenomenon’s wreak devastation on the environment from time to time causing the land to become unsuitable to cultivate. On this subject matter, the human population does not contain the power to stop the wrath of Mother Nature. Rather, we are forced to sit back and watch. Nevertheless, humans engage in a crucial role towards the degradation of the environment in which we live in. Unavoidably, the degradation of the environment is a rising and utmost worldwide subject. I accept that the root cause to environmental degradation is the excessive use of resources on our land utilized by the processes under capitalism. As Jensen wrote in Endgame, “The global industrial economy is the engine for massive environmental degradation and massive human and (nonhuman) impoverishment.

Ever since the late 1970’s, global warming has commonly been considered a hot issue. While the initial craze has died down a bit during the past decade, the overall influence of global warming has definitely left a mark on our eternally evolving society. Naturally, thanks to a handful of documentaries that set out primarily to give the general public a definition of what global warming exactly was and the dangers that it would bring along with its presence, the ever-looming threat of climate change roots itself within most of the population’s minds. As a result of this, such threats have grown to become slightly exaggerated over time, causing several to needlessly panic over what should be considered a nonissue. The truth is that global warming should not really be viewed as a serious affair by anyone, as it is only a part of a natural cycle our planet goes though from time to time.