I am inclined to think that each human generation must consider itself as the steward of the earth and therefore must make available to the succeeding generations an inheritance undiminished to that received.
In this context what does “careful and responsible management” mean? I would say that there are two things that must be begun to make the whole process feasible. The first is that the public must be convinced that it is a responsible caretaker and not an owner and secondly the public must be provided with an acceptable standard whereby it can judge how each major issue affects the accomplishment of the overall task. This is an ongoing forever responsibility for every nation but for the purpose of discussion I am going to speak about it as localized to the US.
Selfishness and greed are fundamental components of human nature. How does a nation cause its people to temper this nature when the payoff goes not to the generation presently in charge but to generations yet to come in the very distant future? Generations too far removed to be encompassed by the evolved biological impulse to care for ones kin.
How is it possible to cause a man or woman to have the same concern for a generation five times removed as that man or woman has for their own progeny? I suspect it is not possible, but it does seem to me to be necessary to accomplish the task of stewardship.
Would it be possible to cause the American people to reject completely the use of air-conditioning so that generations five times removed could survive? Is it possible to create in a person a rational response strong enough to overcome the culturally developed nature of greed and selfishness? The motivation force must be instinctually based, i.e. based upon moral instinct honed through reason in the form of a science of morality.
I claim that a compelling sense of stewardship must come through a comprehension of the science of morality (yet to be developed).
I agree with your sentiment about our responsibility to the planet, but I cannot see that happening: save for a few who have the ability to take up the mantle of global steward.
Air con is not big in private homes here as it is in the U.S. but I would like to see a change-over from nuclear-generated electricity to solar-powered electricity in private residences…
Solar power is the only source of electricity for homes/businesses in the Caribbean (which has taken over from generators) for obvious reasons, but is definitely a blessing in disguise for the environment…
I don’t get it. If air conditioning is seen as a good, then why abolish it? Five generations from now, it may still be seen as a good. So why deprive those future people a good?
It seems unfair.
It clearly is seen as a good, or there would be no reason to try to convince people to give it up.
I don’t have an AC and I really suffer sometimes without it. As in room temp gets so high I sometimes feel sick. I’m sure my sensitivity over heat levels is fairly common among say asthmatics or ect. Anyway in huge parts of the world an AC is neccesary to avoid burning out your home computer.
AC was just one example of what sacrifices that must be considered by a person who seeks to act in a moral fashion about what we owe to future generations.
Morality begins with the moral instinct which is the instincts that make social groups possible.
I am studying “The Sense of Beauty” by George Santayana, “Moral Imagination” by Mark Johnson, and “Art and Visual Perception” by Rudolf Arnheim. I have discovered that the study of values, morality is a species of value, has led me into a study of visual perception, the meaning of ‘meaning’, and the science of art.
The study of psychology and cognitive science has provided a foundation for this effort.
Every aspect of our behavior and knowledge is affected by moral considerations. Morality is about relationships.