RR4

READ
First read

• “I’m a black climate expert. Racism derails our efforts to save the planet”  For context, please note that this Op-ed was written the week following the police killing of George Floyd and eruption of national protests for racial justice)
• McKibben & O’Laughlin, “Big Oil Needs to Pay for the Damage It Caused” 

https://www.yesmagazine.org/opinion/2019/11/15/climate-crisis-big-oil-pay
 
“Black Lives Matter and the Climate”. (How to Save a Planet podcast)
https://gimletmedia.com/shows/howtosaveaplanet/39habgl/black-lives-matter-and-the-climate
 
Second read

• Kyle Powys Whyte, Is it Colonial Déjà Vu? Indigenous Peoples and Climate Injustice

 
Third read

• Kolbert, “Under a White Sky” Chapter 2

 
Fourth read

• Elin Kelsey, “Hope Matters”

Read the following 3 chapters:
 
Introduction (pp 8-12) Note this is the fourth section listed in the eBook, and is different from the one labeled “Intro”

1. The Power of Expectation and Belief
2. The Collateral Damage of Doom and Gloom

 

COMPREHENSION QUESTIONS*

* you are NOT required to submit responses to these questions, but you SHOULD take notes for yourself and be able to answer these after completing each reading. You will use your notes and insights from these questions to develop your Reading Responses (due every 2 weeks in the quarter), so it’s important to take notes as you work through the readings. 
 
First read

1. What are Johnson’s main points for why racism derails efforts to solve the climate crisis?
2. What justifications (ethical, historical, economic, and otherwise) do McKibben & O’Laughlin make for reparations to those harmed by our fossil fuel legacy?
3. Why (according to Maurice Mitchell’s comments in the podcast) has the Movement for Black Lives been so successfully in mobilizing unprecedented numbers of people around the world to get engaged?
4. At one point in the podcast, Johnson asks Colette Pichon Battle what happens when white environmental groups fail to include justice and fail to think about communities of color in their work. What is Battle’s response? How does her account align with underlying arguments from David Suzuki’s The Sacred Balance?

 
Second read

• How has Native pipeline resistance influenced (or even created) the current national & global climate movement?
• Many scholars and activists argue that the climate crisis is simply the culmination of the long history of colonization of indigenous peoples, lands and resources. What are some of the links between social justice, indigenous resistance to colonization, and climate change?

Third Read

1. How would you assess the ethics of fighting climate change by geoengineering our atmosphere? Should we pursue this option? Why or why not? What are the various ethical dilemmas you see with this “solution”?
2. How might a Utilitarian, a Natural Law proponent, and a Deontologist respond to the prospect of geoengineering?

 
Forth Read

• Start taking notes of the most compelling points from this book (whatever speaks more powerfully to you), including the page number and the quote. In an upcoming activity you will “crowdsource” hope by sharing points from this reading you found most relevant.  Please be ready to share/contribute your top takeaways from the material (i.e. TAKE NOTES as you read!)

 
 
Students will write a response to the assigned readings, films and other course materials covered since the last reading response. This is a place for you to record your thoughts about what we’re learning, and further develop the methods of philosophical analysis we will practice in class.  Assessment will be based on evidence that you have remained engaged in class and used each entry to develop your critical thinking, philosophic and ethical perspectives, and understanding of the issues and debates.
 
INSTRUCTIONS
Review the materials assigned since your last submission (2 weeks ago) and write a ~650 word response (longer entries are OK) that touches on the most important ideas/points from *EACH* day. High-scoring responses will integrate concepts from most or ALL assigned materials (although there may be some occasional discussions where you don’t incorporate the smaller/secondary readings or media if you already thoroughly covered the concepts in analyzing the primary/first reading from that day). At a minimum you must address the “main” reading or video (the first one listed in the module) for each day. And to earn an especially high score, you should also touch on the smaller/secondary pieces on the list for that day as well.
 
What do I write about?
Reading responses should record your thoughts and interpretations about what we’re reading, and further develop the methods of *PHILOSOPHIC* and *ETHICAL* analysis we’re practicing in class. What you choose to focus on is ultimately up to you, but it should be based on the assigned material, and ideally trace connections (or contrasts) between those materials. Please go beyond just summarizing the readings to really dig into the implications and philosophic dimensions of the issue. Assessment will be based on evidence that you have remained engaged in class and used each entry to develop your critical thinking, philosophic and ethical perspectives, and understanding of the issues and debates.
Before writing your entry, you can consult the reading comprehension questions (on the daily Canvas modules); however, while these may be helpful to take into consideration, the idea is *NOT* to just answer a list of Canvas questions verbatim, but rather expand on the issues you find interesting, trace connections, and share your unique perspective on them. Also keep in mind that strong philosophic writing often does NOT reduce an issue down to simpler terms, but rather expands on its complexity and ambiguity, revealing additional perspectives, philosophical insights, and possibilities within that work. Responses that engage complexity and nuance in these debates will generally earn a higher score.
 
REQUIREMENTS (grades will be based on these elements)

• Length: ~650 words (longer entries are OK too!)
• Include materials covered in the last 2 weeks. Choose as least the “primary” reading (the first one listed in the module) for EACH day. This means there will be a minimum of 4 items included if we’ve had 4 full class modules since your last submission. High-scoring responses will integrate concepts from most or ALL assigned materials (although there may be some occasional discussions where you don’t incorporate the smaller/secondary readings or media if you already thoroughly covered the concepts in analyzing the primary/”main” reading from that day).
• Take a philosophic or ethical approach to analyzing the material, rather than just summarizing it or focusing on scientific/technical aspects. Remember this is a class on ETHICS, so you should think and write like a philosopher!
• Try to trace connections (or contrasts) between the different materials, rather than discussing different issues for each reading/film featured in your essay.
• Posts should give specific evidence that you completed and understood the week’s assigned materials. This means directly responding to details from the reading (or podcast or film) so I know you completed it. Entries that do not specifically refer to points, arguments, quotes or scenes in the material, but simply lapse into generalizations or personal opinions, will receive a low score.
• You may include personal reflections & experiences related to the topic, but these should not displace the assigned reading.

• Demonstrate that you have remained engaged in class discussions but also developed your own, original thoughts