Anthropocenic Limitations to Climate Engineering

The development of climate engineering research has historically depended on mostly western, holistic perceptions of climate and climate change. Determinations of climate and climate change as a global system have played a defining role in the development of climate engineering. As a result, climate engineering research in general, and solar radiation management (SRM) in particular, is primarily engaged in research of quantified, whole-Earth solutions. I argue that in the potential act of solar radiation management, a view of climate change that relies on the holistic western science of the climatic system is enshrined. This view, dependent on a deliberative intentionality that seems connected to anthropocenic notions of responsibility and control, profoundly influences the assumptions and research methods connected to climate engineering. While this may not necessarily be to the detriment of climate engineering proposals—in fact, it may be the only workable conception of SRM—it is a conceptual limit to the enterprise that has to be acknowledged. Additionally, in terms of governance, reliability, and cultural acceptance, this limit could be a fundamental objection to future experimentation (or implementation).

3. Future generations

Concern about future generations stretches as far back as the Ten Commandments, but the belief that present people can significantly change the future originated as recently as the Enlightenment, along with the belief that our generation may be judged by posterity. ‘Future generations’ considers the moral standing of future generations; the fundamental objection to that belief—‘the Non-Identity Problem’; and the discounting of future interests. If it is agreed that future people and their interests matter, it is still widely held that their interests count for less than current interests. Future preferences and needs are discussed with some of the harmful practices that are detrimental to human and non-human health.

Katzova semantika unutar i izvan transformacijske gramatike

Katz’s semantics (IS) is presented as obsolete attempt to form intensional semantics, and not, as Katz intended — to give dialectical synthesis between classical and causal theory. A fundamental objection refers to an unsuccessful distinction competence/performance, type/replica.

KUYPER’S EARLY CRITIQUE OF UNCHECKED CAPITALISM

It was in the days when European society was in the throes of expanding industrial capitalism that Abraham Kuyper formulated his basic ideas about the pitfalls of the free enterprise system and the need for a structural make-over of society. Already two decades before his mature address of 1891 on the social question, he urged the church to concern herself seriously with the plight of the working classes. In 1874 he railed against “fictitious trade” and mere “paper assets.” In an extensive commentary on his political party’s program (1878/79) he repeated his fundamental objection to the “fictitious expansion of capital”, calling for legislation to curb such excesses and to create a better balance in incomes between the different classes making up society. He argued for equity and justice rather than charity and philanthropy, and for wages and salaries proportional to effort, skill and education. Yet while the gap between rich and poor cried out to heaven, the first step toward solving the social question, according to the youthful Kuyper, was not to focus on the poor but to provide employment opportunities so that the able and willing working man could earn a living wage. He proposed raising import duties and protective tariffs, replacing taxes on necessaries with taxes on luxuries, abolishing government-run lotteries, and lifting the ban on organizing trade-unions. To achieve these reforms, it was essential that the lower classes be given greater representation in parliament and that selfish greed make way for neighbourly love and mutual solidarity.

Under what conditions can oil and gas developments in the Arctic be acceptable, and to whom?

ABSTRACTIt is sometimes argued that the Arctic is so fragile that oil and gas development is never acceptable. Occasionally the argument rests on a fundamental objection to any development of fossil fuel resources. This paper will argue that under some conditions development can be carried out in a way that safeguards the natural environment, and that when the resources are exhausted all traces can be removed. This conclusion applies both offshore and onshore. It will require great sensitivity and care, and the application of the best technology developed by the petroleum industry for developments elsewhere. Some locations will have to be left inviolate until better technology is discovered, and perhaps for ever. The argument will be illustrated by case studies, some of them taken from completed projects.

Entanglement in single-particle systems

We address some of the most commonly raised questions about entanglement, especially with regard to the so-called occupation number entanglement. To answer unambiguously whether entanglement can exist in a one-atom delocalized state, we propose an experiment capable of showing violations of Bell's inequality using only this state and local operations. We review previous discussions for one-photon non-locality and propose a specific experiment for creating one-atom entangled states, showing that the superselection rule of atom number can be overcome. As a by-product, this experiment suggests a means of creating an entangled state of two different chemical species. By comparison with a massless system, we argue that there should be no fundamental objection to such a superposition and its creation may be within reach of present technology.

On keeping word order straight

E-Z Reader is a highly successful model of eye-movement control, employing the notion of a serial-sequential attentional spotlight switched from word to word. Evidence of parallel processing of words in text calls this notion into question. Modifications to the model to accommodate this evidence are possible but will not address the fundamental objection that reading should not be seen as “surrogate listening.”