“Was not their mistake once more bred of the life of slavery that they had been living?—a life which was always looking upon everything, except mankind, animate and inanimate—‘nature,’ as people used to call it—as one thing, and mankind as another, it was natural to people thinking in this way, that they should try to make ‘nature’ their slave, since they thought ‘nature’ was something outside them” — William Morris


Saturday, November 3, 2012

Underground Ecocriticism Liveblog 19

Q: why do we need to contain or fear responses, denigrating them as the hippie response?
A: containment of response in Rio. Not particularly radical though you must credit them with coming up with something at all. Risk management >> precaution says it's not working. Holds open the possibility of not getting the oil out of the rock.
Q: Does precaution exclude interventionist reading?
A: I don't think so. There could be some resistance to the notion of precaution because it sounds conservative and stodgy.

Q: Molly, we can think about and enhance precautionary thinking. In US government this principle has been folded into security risks. Preemption is the opposite of stodgy: acting on the basis of no knowledge to detain people and curtail their liberties with no thinking at all.
A: Or isn't this risk management gone nuts?
Q: But this is too making decisions based on the incalculable. "There is no evidence, but what if we didn't act?"
A: This is a danger of letting conspiracy theory in.

Q: What would precautionary thinking look like in regard to bees?
A: There are lots of agents and yet we would like to stop the die off.
A: The principle was invoked in the removal of pesticides from Europe. Thus they can start looking at some of the other causes. Precaution enables action.

No comments: