Anthropocene: A Scientific And Moral Argument
On a rainy October 1st, Doctor Cuomo took the stage at 7:30 in Williams hall. She was brought in as a guest speaker as a part of the Oxford Studies Program. Her presentation was called, “Against the Idea of the Anthropocene: A Scientific and Moral Argument”. Professor Mousie introduced her. He explained that Doctor Cuomo is a professor of Philosophy and Women’s study at the University of Georgia. At the University, she is also a faculty member of the Environmental Ethics Certificate Program, the Institute for Native American Studies, the Institute of African Studies, and the Initiative on Climate and Society. With all of those qualifications, it was no surprise when Doctor Cuomo delivered a witty and insightful presentation. During the presentation, Doctor Cuomo explained the background and definition of the word Anthropocene. She detailed that it is a term given, informally, to the time period following the Hiroshima bombing during WWII. Currently, the word is used casually in articles to explain the tremendous impact humans have had on the environment. Doctor Cuomo shared that she has no
…show more content…
She told us she felt that if they altered the name of the epoch’s based solely on human interactions with the environment that people would be admitting defeat. Instead, there should be more of a focus on improving the environment. In fact, she mentions, it has really only been the past hundred years or so that we have really started to decimate the earth. Most of humanity has been pretty agreeable, causing only minimal damage to the world around them. If the name is changed there are no longer standard by which we should be trying to get back to. By forsaking the epoch that we currently title ourselves under, the Holocene epoch, we would be able to completely redefine how much pollution is too much. In keeping the term Holocene, we offer hope, hope that that things will return to a more natural
She told us she felt that if they altered the name of the epoch’s based solely on human interactions with the environment that people would be admitting defeat. Instead, there should be more of a focus on improving the environment. In fact, she mentions, it has really only been the past hundred years or so that we have really started to decimate the earth. Most of humanity has been pretty agreeable, causing only minimal damage to the world around them. If the name is changed there are no longer standard by which we should be trying to get back to. By forsaking the epoch that we currently title ourselves under, the Holocene epoch, we would be able to completely redefine how much pollution is too much. In keeping the term Holocene, we offer hope, hope that that things will return to a more natural