The Climate Change Issues Essay Example

who have not made such investments. The concept of expertise revolves around distinguishing between experts and non-experts or lay people. Although an expert's opinion is generally more trustworthy than that of a lay person, it does not always guarantee correctness (Hardwig, 1994). While Hardwig acknowledges the significance of trusting others, his beliefs on most matters are less influential. Leaders, government officials, public and corporate policymakers depend on experts for guidance. Expertise relies on specialization.

It is crucial to recognize that expertise can differ in various fields. Hardwig (1994) proposes that it would be imprudent for experts to solely rely on their own knowledge and abilities. Experts themselves depend on information from other experts in their respective fields. The expert-layperson relationship implies that experts typically possess more knowledge and skills compared to laypeople. Nonetheless, this does not ensure agreement between laypeople and experts' viewpoints. In Oreskes ; Conway's (2008) essay, Singer challenged the expertise of scientists who were knowledgeable and skilled in that specific instance.

When considering the ethics of expertise, it is crucial to acknowledge that an expert's knowledge applies to those who have not sought their expertise. For instance, if A believes that B has reasons to believe p, then A also has reasons to believe p. In this scenario, B's reasons establish them as an expert and cause A to defer to B based on the belief that B has reasons to believe p. Believing in expert testimony has both strengths and weaknesses that stem from the same characteristic of testimony.

A person (referred to as A) often cannot know the reasons of another person (referred to as B), but A still has reasons to believe

in proposition p. This demonstrates that A is somewhat blind because there is a lack of evidence to support why A believes in p. As a result, the vulnerability of individuals who rely on experts increases due to the characteristics that justify appeals to experts (Hardwig, 1994). According to Oreskes & Conway (2008), Schwarzenegger, who was the California governor at the time, announced an initiative to regulate greenhouse gas emissions to address the issue of global warming. While there had been ongoing debates on this matter, Schwarzenegger's announcement put an end to the debate as he had accurate scientific understanding.

The reason for supporting this strategy to address global warming is the change in atmospheric composition resulting from human activities. Specifically, industrial burning of fuels and oils and the emission of greenhouse gases have caused increased levels of carbon dioxide. These gases disturb the balance in the atmosphere, causing a decrease in oxygen levels and an increase in carbon dioxide content.

The Marshall Institute sought to advance the use of scientific knowledge in shaping public policies related to scientific topics, including global warming. The institute argued that the available data on global changes was inadequate and inconclusive, asserting that there is insufficient evidence to verify or dismiss the existence of global warming. Theories indicate that global warming endangers the environment by contributing to extreme weather events such as droughts, heat waves, and hurricanes.

The Marshall Institute disagrees with the evidence presented by global because their program focuses on national security and the environment, as mentioned in their mission statement (Oreskes & Conway, 2008). Individual beliefs influence whether one accepts or rejects the provided evidence (Hardwig, 1994). The Marshall

Institute's stance on global warming exemplifies this situation.

Tobacco was initially recognized as a health hazard, while the presence of Chloro Floro Carbons (CFCs) in the atmosphere, acid rain, and global warming were all linked to harming the atmosphere. Refuting the evidence provided, Singer’s book suggested that scientists persist in discovering new ways of understanding climate change and proposing theories about the global rise in temperatures, even though these temperatures were not increasing as expected based on the greenhouse theory. This assertion was deemed incorrect and deceptive. As a result, scientists carried on investigating new mechanisms of climate change.

The book aimed to investigate potential causes of climate change, rather than doubting the emission of greenhouse gases. It also suggested that global warming was strategically used to create fear about environmental disasters among humans. The book established connections between power plant emissions and acid rain, Chloro Floro Carbons (CFCs) and depletion of the ozone layer, as well as negative health effects caused by tobacco smoke pollution (Oreskes & Conway, 2008). Hardwig (1994) provided guidelines for experts, which include transparency regarding knowledge gaps, differentiation between hypotheses and opinions, truthfulness based on professional judgment, honesty even if it contradicts the desires of employees or those in power, and consideration of the impact of their statements on employees and clients.

When seeking advice from experts, it is vital to find the most qualified individual. However, it is important to recognize that their information may not always be certain. Sometimes, experts may provide guesses or tell people what they want to hear.

Experts within a community should not be subject to rewards or punishments. Instead, they should understand the expectations of their

community and society as a whole. It is crucial for them to foster trust among their members and acknowledge their obligations.

In a society that relies on experts, safeguarding their well-being becomes essential. The existence of expert monopolies based on wealth or power should not be accepted. Additionally, society must understand its responsibility in funding the education and information provided by these experts.

According to Oreskes & Conway's (2008) essay, Singer disputed global warming science through various articles and letters by proposing natural causes for ozone layer depletion and arguing against scientists using environmental scare tactics. He also challenged the issue of environmental tobacco smoke.

According to the author, substances that are dangerous in large amounts do not pose a risk when present in small quantities. Therefore, smoking only affects smokers and has minimal impact on the environment since it releases a limited amount of smoke. America is classified as a highly developed nation, and research indicates that Americans are less concerned about global warming compared to people from other countries. Singer consistently writes articles that challenge scientists with different viewpoints.

His arguments have been extended by others who have been influential in some cases. Most popular scientists have criticized the book for misrepresenting scientific facts (Oreskes ; Conway, 2008).

References

1. Hardwig, J. (1994). Toward an ethics of expertise. Professional ethics and social responsibility, 83-101
2. Oreskes, N., ; Conway, E. M. (2008). Challenging knowledge: How climate science became a victim of the cold war. Contingency and Dissent in Science Project, Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, London School of Economics and Political Science.