From Science to Morality - And back Again?
- 15 Nov 06, 08:50 AM
Have you ever heard the scientific term "feedback loop"? It's a good one, it's how most of life is regulated and it might help this chasm of uselessness that exists between us lay people and the unweildy spectre of climate change that hangs over us.
In the first PEuT show to be broadcast next Monday at 21.02 GMT 91热爆 Radio 4 (online R4 Website, Science ) - Listen again on this blog - you'll hear John Hart from UC Berkeley talking about positive feedback. He's talking about how climate change is heating up the land surface such that the soils release their carbon to the atmosphere in the form of CO2. The carbon dioxide then contributes to global warming exacibating the situation, making the land even warmer and so feeds back on it's own in a building "positive" way. It's like a runaway train. In this sense positive is not a good thing, it purely describes what is happening. So this is a positive feedback loop.
All living things have umpteen feedback loops, both positive and negative, that regulate all our processes. All the chemical messengers in our body are regulated by negative feedback loops. The brain stimulates your glands to secrete hormones to control a function (say digestion), and the presence of those hormones then feeds "negatively" back on the brain to reduce the brain stimulus...this stops the gland hormone being secreted in uncontrollable amounts - it essentially regulates its self.
Ecology works like this. You can imagine a herd of wildebeest roaming the plains of Africa grazing on grass. If the grass is good, the population increases and so do the number of predators. If the grass is poor for successive years, the population goes down and so do the number of lions hunting them. Inherent in the web of life is regulation.
James Lovelock et al have much to say about this in his concept of - here the whole planet regulates its self as one vast living organism.
You could also defend capitalism and democracy being economic and political models which base their existence on feedback mechanisms. Consumers dictate markets and voters decide who is in power.
Can an understanding of feedback loops help us to tackle the challenges of climate change. I think they can.
A year ago we were predominantly hearing about the science of climate change. About nine months ago the idea of ethics crept into the debate...by ethics, how communities should behave within the rules of their society. And then most recently, morality has jumped in. The idea that there is a right and wrong in the anthropogenic causes of climate change.
If climate change is a moral issue then negative feedback to science, industry, communities and political establishments would in principal regulate activities that are damaging to the environment. Put another way, if we as individuals do the right - the morally right - thing, surley that is contributing massively to the feedback loop. Individuals make a difference - managing our waste stream, reducing our energy needs, reducing our transport needs - selective shopping. All of this feedsback through the complex web back to science, technology, industry and policy. This is where capitalism could be the best economic model, because the consumer has power in influence.
I think we need to hear more about solutions to climate change - And to use that rather tarnished word - we need to hear more about how we as individuals can be "empowered" to make a difference.
My next blog is going to be about localism - which I think is on the brink of having the mother of all come backs.
Comments Post your comment
The climate is a chaotic system, and is therefore not subject to positive or negative feedback types of control.
That is why it can't be predicted, and that is why I do not agree with your analysis.
Human Beings cannot affect the climate system or planet in any significant way.
We can affect other life, for there are 6 billion of us, but in this we have no choice.
Ethics are a human concept, the planet and other life on earth do not care what we do.
Complain about this post
Agree. Planet doesn't care. I do think the actions of individuals matter though and can effect the impacrts we have on the earth through driving consumer choices. I think unless we mortals feel that changing our light bulbs, shopping selectively, reducing our own waste stream - biking in stead of driving etc makes a difference then this trajectory wont change. The earth is a complex, you're right. It's our actions I was writing about. It's always good reading your comments, keep them coming - enjoy the show on Monday
Complain about this post
I agree that the planet doesn't care, but it could use a helping hand. Humans are the most polluting species on the planet, and a reduction in the human population would help; I mean about 3/4 of the population. If we don't do that immediately, the global warming will do it for us anyway.
Complain about this post
I do agree with what you say, homeostatis, a way of balancing, a cause and effect. After seeing Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, I felt just that way - definitley looped! I have always lived with the environment in mind, from organic foodstuffs to biodegradable household cleaners/washing powder etc. I live in Hong Kong, and everyday we experience the effect of the China's exponential growth - but what a price to pay - the pollution is excrutiating - so, rather than just do my bit, I am also endeavouring to influence others who really are not doing enough - complacency is really our biggest adversary 'What can I do?' I always hear it - so in order to feel the 'feedback loop', people also have to own up to some sort of personal culpability in this Earth tragedy of ours - now try and tell the Chinese that!!!!
Complain about this post
How on earth do you "reduce" the population by 3/4 . The vast majority of the people born today will still be around in 50 or 60 years time. Once again the eco lobby shoots itself in the foot by showing what a simplistic and fascistic viewpoint it really is. Get real, this programme unfortunately, will be yet another biased and unscientific rant for the chattering classes. Presumably the vast amount of flying around the globe by the makers of this programme and the 6,000 delegates in Nairobi are exempt from any criticism - obviously what is sauce for the eco goose is not for all the rest of us.
Complain about this post
Just a little correction. The consumer NEVER dictates the market in a capitalist system or any other . Availability and pricing does, ie businesses, mostly large corporations and governments. Choice is an marketed illusion.
Complain about this post
Is the planet overpopulated or are our "needs" a little odd these days? I find it really odd that people until only two decades ago who didn麓t even know what an avocado is or had never even tasted salmon or were literally afraid of garlic, find it necessary to hop over for a bit of tapas in Barcelona.
If we do indeed have an overpopulation problem then I would start by criminalising religious leaders who condemn using condoms. In effect, they condemn generations to lives of misery, poverty and disease of overpopulation.
I麓d also have a good go at people like Richard Branson, who pretend to be going all green but at the same time is making millions per second with his private space shuttle service, that uses more of the earth麓s resources in a few minutes, than I ever could in a lifetime. I麓m sick and tired of these people getting away with this sort of hypocracy.
Greedy, mindless behaviour, a total misunderstanding of the words "respect and responsibility", a social atmosphere of who can beat their chest better with more and bigger cars, instead of standard of education, have always been a moral issue and all the warnings of climate change were there in the sixties.
I remember not being allowed to use any cleaning sprays at home back in the sixties and told to minimize my use of water... Which is why I am somewhat perplexed at this being presented as something new.
I think I麓m ranting.;)
It really isn麓t a very difficult moral dilemma. It麓s simple: creativity and construction versus destruction.
Complain about this post