Rethinking Geoengineering Governance Utilizing the Playing God Argument: Considerations of Knowledge, Control, and Benevolence.

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q1 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Julian Dreiman, Brian Patrick Green
{"title":"Rethinking Geoengineering Governance Utilizing the Playing God Argument: Considerations of Knowledge, Control, and Benevolence.","authors":"Julian Dreiman, Brian Patrick Green","doi":"10.1007/s11948-025-00569-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Because greenhouse gas emissions continue to grow, it is increasingly challenging to limit global warming to 1.5 or 2.0 degrees Celsius. As such, there is a growing debate on whether or not to deploy geoengineering to reduce warming. Geoengineering is controversial, and many arguments have been raised against it, including the “playing God” critique. When understood through the philosopher Moti Mizrahi’s reinterpretation, the playing God critique does not eliminate the possibility of using geoengineering, but rather informs how its governance can be improved. We use Mizrahi’s interpretation of the playing God critique to claim that the existing governance literature lacks sufficiently actionable proposals which duly incorporate three components of effective governance: control, knowledge, and benevolence. We then go on to suggest some actionable governance mechanisms aimed at supporting the benevolent use of geoengineering. We believe that a three legged approach to geoengineering governance can both respond to the playing God critique and encourage the development of a more robust, well rounded governance regime.</p>","PeriodicalId":49564,"journal":{"name":"Science and Engineering Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12779705/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Engineering Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-025-00569-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Because greenhouse gas emissions continue to grow, it is increasingly challenging to limit global warming to 1.5 or 2.0 degrees Celsius. As such, there is a growing debate on whether or not to deploy geoengineering to reduce warming. Geoengineering is controversial, and many arguments have been raised against it, including the “playing God” critique. When understood through the philosopher Moti Mizrahi’s reinterpretation, the playing God critique does not eliminate the possibility of using geoengineering, but rather informs how its governance can be improved. We use Mizrahi’s interpretation of the playing God critique to claim that the existing governance literature lacks sufficiently actionable proposals which duly incorporate three components of effective governance: control, knowledge, and benevolence. We then go on to suggest some actionable governance mechanisms aimed at supporting the benevolent use of geoengineering. We believe that a three legged approach to geoengineering governance can both respond to the playing God critique and encourage the development of a more robust, well rounded governance regime.

利用扮演上帝的论点重新思考地球工程治理:对知识、控制和仁慈的考虑。
由于温室气体排放持续增长,将全球变暖限制在1.5或2.0摄氏度越来越具有挑战性。因此,关于是否利用地球工程来减少气候变暖的争论越来越多。地球工程是有争议的,有许多反对它的观点,包括“扮演上帝”的批评。当通过哲学家莫蒂·米兹拉希的重新解释来理解时,扮演上帝的批评并没有消除使用地球工程的可能性,而是告诉我们如何改进其管理。我们使用米兹拉希对扮演上帝批判的解释,声称现有的治理文献缺乏足够的可操作的建议,这些建议适当地结合了有效治理的三个组成部分:控制、知识和仁慈。然后,我们提出了一些可行的治理机制,旨在支持地球工程的善意使用。我们认为,地球工程治理的三条腿方法既可以回应“扮演上帝”的批评,又可以鼓励更健全、更全面的治理制度的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Science and Engineering Ethics
Science and Engineering Ethics 综合性期刊-工程:综合
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
5.40%
发文量
54
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science and Engineering Ethics is an international multidisciplinary journal dedicated to exploring ethical issues associated with science and engineering, covering professional education, research and practice as well as the effects of technological innovations and research findings on society. While the focus of this journal is on science and engineering, contributions from a broad range of disciplines, including social sciences and humanities, are welcomed. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, ethics of new and emerging technologies, research ethics, computer ethics, energy ethics, animals and human subjects ethics, ethics education in science and engineering, ethics in design, biomedical ethics, values in technology and innovation. We welcome contributions that deal with these issues from an international perspective, particularly from countries that are underrepresented in these discussions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书