Thursday, April 16, 2020

"This is the precautionary principle on steroids."

Raisa asked this morning about my thinking ahead to the fall semester ethics course and including pandemic-related topics in that class. Here's an article at Reason.com that talks about the civil liberties issues in Michigan and about what some consider to be Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer's "excessive quarantining." The entire article is worth reading in full, but this passage caught my eye in light of our discussion this week about the precautionary principle:

Most local lockdowns have their share of nuttiness (for example, in Florida and D.C., you can walk through parks but not sit down) and excesses (a Philadelphia man was handcuffed for playing with his daughter in an empty softball field). But so long as the ratio of good sense to nonsense is relatively high, for the most part Americans have gone along. Irate residents and partisans seeking to exploit these measures for political gain have been marginalized.

But that changed in Michigan with Whitmer's new executive order that not only extended the state's shelter-in-place mandate till the end of the month—something most everyone had expected and accepted—but added arguably the country's most draconian and nonsensical provisions.

Even as neighboring Indiana and Ohio are relaxing their orders and the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency guidelines are classifying more industries as "essential" so that they can reopen and minimize the economic hit from the shutdown, Whitmore has gone the other way on the pretext that Michigan has the third-highest share of coronavirus cases in the country.

She ordered big box stores to stop selling paint, carpets, and other home-improvement material not considered essential, though as Reason's Billy Binion reported, she does allow lottery ticket sales, probably because the proceeds go to the state's K-12 funds.

She shut down lawn-care services. Contender's Tree and Lawn Specialist Inc., a company that purchased hundreds of thousands of dollars of fertilizer and other supplies had to stop spraying its plants in the middle of spring season, risking its entire crop. (Michigan's gardening industry, with an estimated retail value of $580 million to $700 million and 9,000 employees, faces a complete loss this year if it isn't able to operate soon.)

In addition to large gatherings, she also barred families that don't share a home from getting together, preventing one man from seeing his girlfriend of 14 years because she doesn't live with him.

She forbade families from traveling to their vacation cottages in northern Michigan, a popular springtime activity in Michigan. She shut down golf courses and prohibited motorized boats, although non-motorized ones are allowed, for some reason.

This is arbitrary and irrational micromanagement that has understandably irritated many residents.

What's more, Whitmer has decreed that violations will count as misdemeanors punishable by up to a $1,000 civil fine. Criminal penalties are also on the table, should prosecutors choose to pursue that. Meanwhile, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has gone full China and is encouraging employees to rat out their bosses and call the police if they try to open up shop in violation of the lockdown.

What's so outrageous about all this is that the new businesses and activities that Whitmer is targeting can all be safely conducted while adhering to strict social distancing rules. But Whitmer's theory apparently is that anything beyond absolutely essential conduct jeopardizes frontline workers. This is the precautionary principle on steroids. It considers even an infinitesimal increase in secondary risk as unacceptable, a mindset that could justify stopping virtually any activity anytime.

Anyway, the entire article is at https://reason.com/2020/04/16/michigan-gov-gretchen-whitmer-provides-a-lesson-in-what-states-shouldnt-do-to-stop-a-pandemic/ .

Jim

Wednesday, April 15, 2020

Great piece on probabilistic reasoning at Slate Star Codex

Here's a nice essay about probabilistic reasoning under conditions of uncertainty, using the coronavirus as a case example:

"A Failure, But Not Of Prediction"


https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/04/14/a-failure-but-not-of-prediction/  

Tuesday, April 14, 2020

Here's some info on the book by Pielke Jr. I mentioned in class this morning:



https://www.amazon.com/Honest-Broker-Making-Science-Politics/dp/0521694817

Thursday, April 9, 2020

Testing the blog to see if it's still active

In the era of online instruction, an old tool comes out of the toolbox

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Following up on today's discussion ...

Yuriko Saito talks with a student (in her everyday habitat) via
I was doing some research for my final paper and I found a really interesting article written by Yuriko Saito, a (female) Japanese philosopher at the Rhode Island School of Design, titled 'Everyday Aesthetics'. I thought I'd share it, in case anyone remains frustrated with the fine art / nature comparison in environmental aesthetics- this might assuage your frayed nerves a bit. Evan- you know I'm talking to you.

Anyhow, after doing a little library sleuthing, I have found out that her work encompasses the relationship of aesthetic theory and environmental ethics, the moral dimensions of the Japanese aesthetic, and a critique on the primacy of the aesthetics of fine art acting as the main point of departure for applications in environmental ethics / aesthetics ... super fascinating. Here's her website at RISD for more about her.

I'm attaching a link to the article 'Everyday Aesthetics', and I have more of her essays in pdfs if you all are interested. If this doesn't work (you might have to be signed in to Cornell netid), I can email the file to anyone who wants it. Yuriko has been included in a bunch of anthologies on Environmental Ethics/Aesthetics, including the one Jim passed around today edited by Carlson and Berleant as well as having fairly recently published her own book (also called 'Everyday Aesthetics').

Thursday, April 19, 2012

hi guys, just an fyi that the lecture by Roger Pielke Jr. on his book, The Climate Fix, is now available on Pielke's website, and it has been updated to include the slides integrated into the presentation video.

Check it out at http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2012/04/climate-fix-lecture-with-slides.html .

Jim

Technology and Aesthetics


I was thinking about our discussion today in class, and was left wondering what role technology plays in our views/emotions towards nature.

Ritwick asked if experiencing nature first-hand is required for that emotional or spiritual connection associated with aesthetics. I personally think it is - none of us really had an emotional reaction to seeing the Double Rainbow footage in the video. Undoubtedly, double rainbow guy’s sound-effects probably took away from that intimate personal experience that we could have had, but I think that speaks to the importance of “framing” or presenting. Although he had a spiritual connection, we interpreted it as being funny and that perhaps took away from the reaction we “should’ve” had towards the double rainbow. Basically, how the natural episode is framed/presented makes a difference i.e. we’d have a different appreciation if a double rainbow was filmed on a Planet Earth special compared to on that youtube video.

Technology is certainly a great way for people who can’t otherwise experience certain places to get a feel for what that area is like; however, videotaping or taking pictures of nature subtracts from the emotional connection that the person could’ve had, in turn, disempowering that natural feature. Do you agree?