A2 Heidegger - Weekly Block

April gth - A Heidegger Hooston-Memoriul o11-1
1[ Churles Lui
April gth - A Heidegger
zAC ronLIIne ................................................................................................................................................................ 1
#ANOM PI#M SOLVINCY ............................................................................................ 11
Perm SolvencyCalculation Ensures Survival .......................................................... Irror! Bookmurk not deIined.
Perm SolvencyGood Eco-Management......................................................................................................................... 1z
Perm SolvencyLocal Opposition................................................................................................................................... 1z
Perm SolvencyOntological Blindness ........................................................................................................................... 1q
Perm Solvency!oIILIcIzuLIon ....................................................................................................................................... 16
Perm Solvency!:-IIc !urLIcIpuLIon .............................................................................................................................1;
Perm Solvency$cIence In $ocIuI ConLexL ................................................................................................................... 1q
!erm $oIvency-$LeppIng $Lone ................................................................................................................................. zo
!erm $oIvency-$:8LuInu-IIILy .................................................................................................................................... z1

[ Churles Lui
Notes

WeIcome Lo LIe 8econd edILIon oI The Weell locl on www.memorIuIde-uLe.com. TII8 week we C Money
(cup IInk) -rIng8 yo: un8wer8 Lo un o-8c:re K LIuL dIed uILer LIe uILernuLIve energy LopIc -:L I8 8oon Lo -e
revIved on LIe 8puce LopIc, LIe HeIdegger K. Bu8IcuIIy, LIe K LuIk8 u-o:L Iow o:r LecInoIogIcuI, 8cIenLIIIc,
munugerIuI Iorm oI LIo:gIL wIere we uppIy LIIng8 Lo 8oIve LIIng8 und LecInIcuI Ideu8 Lo 8Lop pro-Iem8 I8 -ud.
n8Leud oI 8eeIng LIe InIerenL -eu:Ly In u 8:nrI8e, we In8Leud 8ee LIe pIenomenon u8 8ImpIy excILed pIoLon8
8LrIkIng wuLer vupor uL u wuveIengLI oI q; nunomeLer8. TIey wIII urg:e LIuL LII8 8orL oI LecInoIogIcuI LIInkIng
o-8c:re8 LIe InIerenL -eu:Ly und vuI:e Lo IIIe oI LIe worId.

B:II8IIL, Ie`8 u nuzI IoI

HopeI:IIy LII8 -Iock 8Io:Id IeIp un8wer LIo8e urg:menL8 preLLy weII. And IopeI:IIy cump8 p:L o:L IIIe8 8o
don`L Iuve Lo muke one.

:v
[ Churles Lui
AC Irontline

Oor interpretution is thut the AII most reud u topicul Plun Text und the Neg most udvocute
either the stutos qoo or u competitive policy option

A) Predictubility - There ure un inIinite nomber oI competing Irumeworks to evuloute u debute
- The resolotion reqoires Iederul government uction which is the only predictuble Irumework
Meursheimer 1qqg (JoIn, !roIe88or oI !oIILIcuI $cIence uL LIe UnIver8ILy oI CIIcugo,
nLernuLIonuI $ec:rILy, WInLer qqJq)

NeverLIeIe88, crILIcuI LIeorI8L8 reudIIy ucknowIedge LIuL reuII8m Iu8 -een LIe domInunL InLerpreLuLIon oI InLernuLIonuI poIILIc8 Ior uImo8L 8even I:ndred
yeur8. "ReuII8m I8 u nume Ior u dI8co:r8e oI power und r:Ie In modern gIo-uI IIIe." $LIII, crILIcuI LIeory uIIow8 Ior cIunge, und LIere I8 no reu8on,
uccordIng Lo LIe LIeory unywuy, wIy u comm:nILurIun dI8co:r8e oI peuce und Iurmony cunnoL 8:ppIunL LIe reuII8L dI8co:r8e oI 8ec:rILy compeLILIon und
wur. n IucL, cIunge I8 uIwuy8 po88I-Ie wILI crILIcuI LIeory -ecu:8e IL uIIow8 Ior un :nIImILed n:m-er oI dI8co:r8e8,
und IL muke8 no j:dgmenL u-o:L LIe merIL or 8LuyIng power oI uny purLIc:Iur one. AI8o, crILIcuI LIeory muke8 no j:dgmenL
u-o:L wIeLIer I:mun -eIng8 ure "Iurd-wIred Lo -e good or -ud, -:L In8Leud LreuL8 peopIe u8 InIInILeIy cIungeu-Ie. TIe key Lo Iow LIey LIInk und -eIuve
I8 LIe purLIc:Iur ''8oILwure progrum" LIuL IndIvId:uI8 curry uro:nd In LIeIr Ieud8, und LIo8e cun -e cIunged. n e88ence, crILIcuI LIeorI8L8 Iope Lo repIuce
LIe wIdeIy :8ed reuII8L 8oILwure puckuge wILI new 8oILwure LIuL empIu8Ize8 comm:nILurIun norm8. Once LIuL 8wILcI Iu8 -een mude, 8LuLe8 wIII
cooperuLe wILI eucI oLIer und worId poIILIc8 wIII -e more peuceI:I.

B) Irr AII on Irumework- The AII shoold be ullowed to pick the Irumework becuose the
negutive cun obviute S minotes oI the 1AC by decluring u diIIerent Irumework - This is onIuir
und ondermines edocution

C) Borden oI the #ejoinder - The most busic negutive reqoirement is thut they huve to disprove
the AII, which meuns thut they most respond to it directly, chunging the viewpoint oI the debute
does not disprove the cluims oI the 1AC bot ucts only us u noncompetitive observution.

) Idocution Policy debutes ure criticul to edocution uboot government uction, whether yoo
like the stute or not -- reIosul to debute speciIic policies cedes the whole discossion to elites
Wult 'q1 - ($LepIen, !roIe88or - U CIIcugo, Internctioncl Studies Qucrterl, )
A 8econd norm I8 reIevunce, u -eIIeI LIuL even IIgIIy u-8LrucL IIne8 oI Inq:Iry 8Io:Id -e g:Ided -y LIe gouI oI 8oIvIng reuI-
worId pro-Iem8. Becu:8e LIe vuI:e oI u gIven upproucI muy noL -e uppurenL uL LIe -egInnIng-gume LIeory I8 un o-vIo:8 exumpIe-we cunnoL In8I8L
LIuL u new upproucI -e ImmedIuLeIy uppIIcu-Ie Lo u 8pecIIIc re8eurcI p:zzIe. On LIe wIoIe, Iowever, LIe -eIIeI LIuL 8cIoIur8IIp In 8ec:rILy
uIIuIr8 8Io:Id -e IInked Lo reuI-worId I88:e8 Iu8 prevenLed LIe IIeId Irom degeneruting into selI-indolgent
intellectoulizing. And Irom LIe GoIden Age Lo LIe pre8enL, 8ec:rILy 8L:dIe8 Iu8 pro-u-Iy Iud more reuI-worId ImpucL, Ior good or III, LIun mo8L
ureu8 oI 8ocIuI 8cIence. InuIIy, LIe renuI88unce oI 8ec:rILy 8L:dIe8 Iu8 -een g:Ided -y u commILmenL Lo democruLIc dI8co:r8e. RuLIer LIun
conIInIng dI8c:88Ion oI 8ec:rILy I88:e8 Lo un eIILe gro:p oI LIe -e8L und -rIgILe8L, 8cIoIur8 In LIe renuI88unce Iuve generuIIy
weIcomed u more I:IIy InIormed de-uLe. To purupIru8e CIemenceu:, I88:e8 oI wur und peuce ure Loo ImporLunL Lo -e IeIL
8oIeIy Lo In8Ider8 wILI u ve8Led InLere8L In LIe o:Lcome. TIe growLI oI 8ec:rILy 8L:dIe8 wILIIn :nIver8ILIe8 I8 one 8Ign oI -rouder purLIcIpuLIon, uIong
wILI Increu8ed uvuIIu-IIILy oI InIormuLIon und more ucce88I-Ie p:-IIcuLIon8 Ior InLere8Led cILIzen8. AILIo:gI LII8 vIew I8 -y no meun8 :nIver8uI, LIe
renuI88unce oI 8ec:rILy 8L:dIe8 Iu8 -een 8Iuped -y LIe -eIIeI LIuL u weII-InIormed de-uLe I8 LIe best wuy to uvoid the
disusters LIuL ure IIkeIy wIen nuLIonuI poIIcy I8 monopoIIzed -y u Iew 8eII-InLere8Led purLIe8.

I) This is u voting issoe Ior Iuirness, edocution, und predictubility.

q[ Churles Lui

1. Torn - Technologicul thooght is only bud becuose oI u luck oI the right kind oI rutionulity -the
plun ullows u reIlection oI ends thut is uble to coonter the hegemony oI instromentul reuson.
Wolin, qo - DI8LIng:I8Ied !roIe88or oI HI8Lory uL LIe CILy UnIver8ILy oI New York Grud:uLe CenLer (RIcIurd
WoIIn, The Politics oj ein, !. 16;)

Heidegger's theory oI technology oltimutely collupses onder the weight oI its own selI-imposed
conceptoul limitutions. And LI:8, LIe intrinsic shortcomings oI his theoreticul Irumework prevent
him Irom entertuining the prospect thut the problem oI technologicul dominution owes more to
the deurth oI reuson in the modern world ruther thun un excess. Ior in modern liIe, the
purumeters oI rutionulity huve been premutorely restricted: Iormul or instromentul reuson hus
uttuined de Iucto hegemony; pructicul reuson-reIlection on ends-hus been eIIectively
murginulized. Insteud oI the "overcoming" oI reuson recommended by Heidegger, whut is
needed is un expunsion oI reuson's boonduries, soch thut the uotonomoos logic oI instromentul
rutionulity is sobordinuted to u rutionul reIlection on ends. $ImIIurIy, HeIdegger'8 Ince88unL IumenLuLIon8 concernIng
LIe "wIII Lo wIII-LIe LIeoreLIcuI prI8m LIro:gI wIIcI Ie vIew8 LIe modern projecL oI I:mun 8eII-u88erLIon In IL8 enLIreLy- onIy 8erve Lo conI:8e LIe
pro-Iem uL I88:e?; TIuL LIe Iorce8 oI LecInoIogy und Ind:8Lry IoIIow un IndependenL IogIc.

g[ Churles Lui

. Ithics come beIore ontology - Heidegger's Iuilore to diIIerentiute between the Holocuost und
mechunized ugricoltore proves the impotence oI ontologicul reussessment ulone
ArnoId . uvidson, coedILor oI CrILIcuI nq:Iry, A88oc !roI oI !IIIo8opIy, U oI CIIcugo, CrILIcuI nq:Iry,
WInLer 1qSq. p.qzq-6
!IIIIppe uco:e-u-urLIe, wIo -ro:gIL LII8 8LuLemenL Lo promInence und dI8c:88e8 IL uL IengLI In u IcLIon d: poIILIq:e, udmIL8 LIuL insoIur us
Heidegger intended to reIer the gus chumbers und deuth cumps to the essence oI technology his
thooght is "u-8oI:LeIy jost. " Bot the jostice oI this condemnution, by wuy oI the relution between
technology und nihilism, is by itselI "scunduloosly insoIIicient" (E p. 8). AccordIng Lo uco:e-u-urLIe, this
scunduloos insoIIiciency resolts Irom the Iuct thut Heidegger never ucknowledged thut this
muss exterminution wus essentiully |po:r I`e88enLIuI| the exterminution oI the Jews, und thut this Iuct
mukes Ior un incommensoruble diIIerence Irom the economic und militury pructice oI
blockudes, or even the prodoction oI nocleur weupons, not to mention the mechunizution oI the
Iood indostry (, pp. 8-q).z or uco:e- u-urLIe, u8 Ior BIuncIoL und evInu8, Heidegger's silence concerning the
Iinul Solotion, his Iuilore to pronoonce the nume oI the Jews, is whut remuins beyond purdon.
And LIInk LIuL behind this silence, wIen one enco:nLer8 HeIdegger`8 1qqq prono:ncemenL, one cunnot bot be stuggered
by his Inu-IIILy-cuII IL metuphysicul inubility-to ucknowledge the everyduy Iute oI bodies und sools,
us iI the boreuocrutized borning oI selected homun beings were not ull thut diIIerent Irom the
threut to homunity posed in the orgunizution oI the Iood indostry by the Iorces oI technology?
The mechunizution oI ugricoltore muy be u cuose Ior worry; LIe prod:cLIon oI Iydrogen -om-8 I8 u reu8on Ior Lerror;
LIe economIc -Iockude8 oI co:nLrIe8 muy-e evII; bot the prodoction oI corpses in the gus chumbers und deuth
cumps brings os Iuce to Iuce with the experience oI- horror. Where huve these distinctions gone?
Homunism uside, whut hus become oI the homun? AL A:8cIwILz, 8uy8 uco:e-u-urLIe, LIe Jew8 were LreuLed u8 Ind:8LrIuI
wu8Le (, pp. 1-6z). o we huve no criteriu oI evuloution to distingoish between die wuste prodocts oI
technology und the prodoction oI homun corpses in the gus chumbers? Are LIe udvunce8 oI HeIdegger`8 LIo:gIL
In8epuru-Ie Irom LII8 IndIIIerence Lo LIe 8pecIIIcuIIy I:mun? By LIe udvunce8 oI HeIdegger`8 LIo:gIL meun Lo reIer, umong oLIer LIIng8, Lo II8
InLerpreLuLIon oI NIeLz8cIe`8 pIru8e, "God I8 deud. A8 u con8eq:ence oI LIe NIeLz8cIeun deuLI oI God, u8 HeIdegger weII :nder8Lood, LIe LrudILIonuI
Io:nduLIon8 oI I:munI8m ure LIrown InLo q:e8LIon, A8 GuveI| 8:ccIncLIy p:L8 LII8 LIo:gIL: "NIeLz8cIe`8 Ideu oI LIe deuLI oI God cun -e :nder8Lood Lo
-egIn -y 8uyIng . . . : LIe Ideu oI God I8 purL oI (LIe Ideu oI) I:mun nuL:re. I LIuL Ideu dIe8, LIe Ideu oI I:mun nuL:re eq:uIIy dIe8" (CR, p. q8). $o LIere
I8 no q:e8LIon Iere oI u reL:rn Lo LIe oId Ideu oI I:mun nuL:re; LIe Lu8k I8 Lo recover LIe I:mun uILer LIe deuLI oI God. HeIdegger`8 InLerpreLuLIon oI LII8
Lu8k Ieuve8 IIm onIy one puLI oI recovery---the homun most be rethooght throogh Being, und it is this
sobordinution oI being homun to Being thut leuds to the problems oI soppression und
indiIIerence, und to the violent retorn oI the repressed, LIuL Iuve |conLIn:ed| 8keLcIed. :nder8Lund evInu8` work Lo
8:gge8L unoLIer puLI Lo LIe recovery oI LIe I:mun, one LIuL Ieud8 LIro:gI or Lowurd oLIer I:mun -eIng8: TIe dImen8Ion oI LIe dIvIne open8 IorLI Irom
LIe I:mun Iuce. . . . Hence meLupIy8Ic8 I8 enucLed wIere LIe 8ocIuI reIuLIon I8 enucLed- In o:r reIuLIon8 wILI men .... TIe OLIer I8 noL LIe IncurnuLIon oI
God, -:L precI8eIy -y II8 Iuce, In wIIcI Ie I8 dI8IncurnuLe, I8 LIe munIIe8LuLIon oI LIe IeIgIL In wIIcI God I8 reveuIed. L I8 o:r reIuLIon8 wILI men . . . LIuL
gIve Lo LIeoIogIcuI concepL8 LIe 8oIe 8IgnIIIcuLIon LIey udmIL oI. Levinus pluces ethics beIore ontology by beginning
with oor experience oI the homun Iuce; und, In u cIeur reIerence Lo HeIdegger`8 IdoIuLry oI LIe vIIIuge IIIe oI peu8unL8, Ie u88ocIuLe8
IIm8eII wILI $ocruLe8, wIo preIerred LIe cILy wIere Ie enco:nLered men Lo LIe co:nLry wILI IL8 Lree8. n II8 dI8c:88Ion oI 8kepLIcI8m und LIe pro-Iem
oI oLIer8, CuveII uI8o uIIgn8 IIm8eII wILI LII8 puLI oI LIo:gIL, wILI LIe recovery oI LIe IInILe I:mun 8eII LIro:gI LIe ucknowIedgmenL oI oLIer8: A8 Iong
u8 God exI8L8, 1 um noL uIone. And co:Idn`L LIe oLIer 8:IIer LIe IuLe oI God? . .. wI8I Lo :nder8Lund Iow LIe oLIer now -eur8 LIe weIgIL oI God, 8Iow8
me LIuL um noL uIone In LIe :nIver8e. TII8 req:Ire8 :nder8LundIng LIe pIIIo8opIIcuI pro-Iem oI LIe oLIer u8 LIe Lruce or 8cur oI LIe depurL:re oI God.
|CR, p. q;o|. The soppression oI the other, the homun, in Heidegger's thooght uccoonts, -eIIeve, Ior
the ubsence, in his writing uIter the wur, oI the experience oI horror. Horror is ulwuys directed
towurd the homun; every object oI horror beurs the imprint oI the homun will.8 $o Levinus cun
see in Heidegger's silence u-o:L LIe gu8 cIum-er8 und deuLI cump8 "u kind oI consent to the horror."q And CuveII
cun cIurucLerIze NuzI8 u8 LIo8e wIo Iuve Io8L LIe cupucILy Ior -eIng IorrIIIed -y wIuL LIey do.qo Where wus Heidegger's horror?
How coold he huve Iuiled to know whut he hud consented to? HunnuI ArendL u88ocIuLe8 HeIdegger wILI !u:I VuIery'8
upIorI8m, " 'e8 vmmenL8 ne 8onL q:e c:mu de8 cIo8e8` ('Ivents ure bot the Ioum oI things')."`q1 LIInk one :nder8Lund8 LIe
8o:rce oI Ier InL:ILIon. The muss exterminution oI homun beings, however, does not prodoce Ioum, bot
dost und ushes; und it is here thut qoestioning most stop.

6[ Churles Lui
!oeLIc8:
Yoo onlookers,
Yoo who ruised no hund in morder,
Bot who did not shuke the dost Irom yoor longing,
Yoo who hulted there, where dost is chunged
To light.

3. Management of nature and the world is inevitable and the alternative's approach doesn't solve status
quo policies that are worse than the plan like oil companies, warming, and pollution.

q. Torn - "Letting beings be permits oltimute violence to occor. Heidegger ignores the Iuct thut
not reucting in the Iuce oI nocleur esculution mukes the Alt colpuble Ior unnihilution. Khulilzud
und Beurden suy thut withoot LS Heg oor world woold be u mess. This evidence ussomes yoor
uothors und unswers the urgoment thut ontology ootweighs nocleur wur.
RonuId E. Suntoni, !III. !roI DenI8on, 1qSg, N:cIeur Wur, ed. ox und Grourke, p. 16-;

To -e 8:re, ox 8ee8 LIe need Ior o:r :ndergoIng cerLuIn I:ndumenLuI cIunge8 In o:r LIInkIng, -eIIeI8, uLLIL:de8, vuI:e8 und Zimmermun
culls Ior u "purudigm shiIt in oor thinking uboot oorselves, other, und the Iurth. Bot it is not
cleur thut wIuL eILIer oIIer8 u8 soggestions Ior wIuL we cun, m:8L, or 8Io:Id do In LIe Iuce oI u r:nuwuy urm8
ruce ure soIIicient to "wind down the urms ruce beIore it leuds to omnicide. n 8pILe oI LIe ImporLunce oI
ox`8 unuIy8I8 und remInder8 IL I8 noL cIeur LIuL udmILLIng o:r (n:cIeur) Ieur und unxIeLy Lo o:r8eIve8 und IdenLIIyIng LIe mecIunI8m8 LIuL d:II or
mu8k o:r emoLIonuI und oLIer re8pon8e8 repre8enL m:cI more LIun exumpIe8 oI -u8Ic, oILen. 8LuLed prIncIpIe8 oI p8ycIoLIerupy. BeIng uwure oI LIe
p8ycIoIogIcuI mune:ver8 LIuL keep :8 n:m- Lo n:cIeur reuIILy muy weII -e LIe roud Lo Lrun8cendIng LIem -:L IL m:8L onIy -e u IIr8L 8Lep (u8 ox
ucknowIedge8), d:rIng wIIcI we $Im:ILuneo:8Iy ucL Lo eIImInuLe n:cIeur LIreuL8, -reuk o:r compIIcILy wILI LIe um8 ruce, geL rId oI ur8enuI8 oI genocIduI
weuponry, und creuLe condILIon8 Ior InLernuLIonuI goodwIII, m:L:uI Lr:8L, und creuLIve InLerdependence. $ImIIurIy, in respect to
Zimmermun: in spite oI the chullenging Heideggeriun insights Ie -rIng8 o:L regurdIng wIuL
moLIvuLe8 LIe urm8 ruce, muny qoestions muy be ruised uboot his prescribed "solotions. Given
oor need Ior u purudigm shiIt in oor {distorted) onderstunding oI oorselves und the rest oI
being, ure we merely leIt "to prepure Ior u possible shiIt In o:r 8eII-:nder8LundIng? (ILuIIc8 mIne)? Is this
ull we cun do? Is it necessurily the cuse thut soch u shiIt "cunnot come us u resolt oI oor own
will? - und work - bot only Irom "u destiny ootside oor control? oes this meun we leuve to God
the mutter oI bringing uboot u purudigm shiIt? GrunLed o:r Ieur8 und LIe ImporLunce oI noL -eIng conLroIIed -y Ieur8, u8 weII
u8 o:r unLIropocenLrIc IeunIng8, 8Io:Id we -e u8 cu:LIo:8 u8 ZImmermun 8:gge8L8 u-o:L o:L dI8po8ILIon Lo wunL Lo do 8omeLIIng or Lo ucL decI8IveIy
In LIe Iuce oI LIe c:rrenL LIreuL? In spite oI the importunce oI oor tuking on the unxiety oI oor Iinitode und
oor present limitution, does it Iollow thut "we shoold be willing Ior LIe wor8L (I.e. un ull-oot nocleur
wur) to occor? Zimmermun wrongly, conLend, eqoutes "resistunce with "deniul when he suys
thut "us long us we resist und deny the possibility oI nocleur wur, thut possibility will persist
und grow stronger. He ulso wrongly perceives "resistunce us presopposing u clinging to the
"order oI things thut now prevuils. #esistunce connotes opposing, und striving to deIeut u
prevuiling stute oI uIIuirs thut woold ullow or encooruge the "worst to occor. 8:-mIL, uguIn8L
ZImmermun, LIuL we shoold not, in uny sense, be willing Ior nocleur wur or omnicide to occor. (TII8 I8 not
Lo 8:gge8L LIuL we 8Io:Id -e n:m- Lo LIe po88I-IIILy oI IL8 occ:rrence.) De8pILe ZImmermun`8 eIu-oruLIon8 und reIInemenL8 his Heideggeriun
notion oI "letting beings be continoes to be too permissive In LII8 regurd. n my j:dgmenL, un individoul's
decision not to uct uguinst und resist his or her government's prepurutions Ior nocleur
holocuost is, u8 Iuve urg:ed eI8ewIere, Lo -e un eurly uccomplice to the most horrendoos crime uguinst
liIe imuginuble - its unnihilution. TIe N:rem-:rg LrudILIon cuII8 noL onIy Ior u new wuy oI LIInkIng, u new
InLernuLIonuII8m In wIIcI we uII -ecome co-n:rL:rer8 oI LIe wIoIe pIuneL, -:L Ior re8oI:Le ucLIon8 LIuL wIII
8ever o:r compIIcILy wILI n:cIeur crImInuIILy und LIe genocIduI urm8 ruce, und work Lo ucIIeve u I:L:re wIIcI we cun no
Ionger u88:me. We most noL onIy come Iuce Lo Iuce wILI LIe :nLIInku-Ie In Imuge und LIo:gIL (ox) -:L m:8L uct now -
wILI u new con8cIo:8ne88 und con8cIence - Lo prevenL LIe :nLIInku-Ie, -y cIeun8Ing LIe eurLI oI n:cIeur weuponry. Only when thut is
uchieved will oltimute violence be removed us the Iinul urbiter oI oor plunet's Iute.

,[ Churles Lui

g. Torn - Aothenticity - The Alt is bused on u notion oI uothenticity thut sepurutes pructicul
reuson Irom troe being-in-the-world.
Wolin, qo - DI8LIng:I8Ied !roIe88or oI HI8Lory uL LIe CILy UnIver8ILy oI New York Grud:uLe CenLer - 1qqo
(RIcIurd WoIIn, TIe !oIILIc8 oI BeIng, !. -q)

AILIo:gI un :nder8LundIng oI HeIdegger'8 poIILIcuI LIo:gIL 8Io:Id In no wuy -e red:ced Lo LIe concreLe poIILIcuI cIoIce8 mude -y LIe pIIIo8opIer In LIe
1qo8, neILIer I8 IL enLIreIy 8epuru-Ie LIereIrom. And while LIe 8LruLegy oI II8 upologists Iu8 -een Lo dI88ocIuLe LIe pIIIo8opIy Irom LIe
empIrIcuI per8on, LIere-y soggestIng thut Heidegger's Nuzism wus un onessentiul uberrution in the hope oI
exempting the philosophy Irom politicul tuint, this strutegy will not wush Ior 8everuI reu8on8. To -egIn wILI,
Heidegger's philosophy itselI woold seem to role oot the urtiIiciul, truditionul philosophicul
sepurution between thooght und uction. In troth, moch oI Being und Time is concerned with
overcoming the conventionul philosophicul division between theoreticul und pructicul reuson; u
Iuct thut is evident ubove ull in the "prugmutic" point oI depurtore oI the unulytic oI usein:
"Being-in- the-world" ruther thun the Curtesiun "thinking sobstunce." More ImporLunLIy, LIo:gI, wIuL I8
perhups the centrul cutegory oI Heidegger's existentiul ontology-the cutegory oI "uothenticity''-
uotomuticully preclodes soch u Iucile sepurution between philosophicul ootlook und concrete
liIe-choices. As u work oI Iondumentul ontology, Being und Time uims ut delineuting the essentiul,
existentiul determinunts oI homun Being-in-the-world. HeIdegger reIer8 Lo LIe8e 8Lr:cL:re8 (e.g., "cure," "IuIIenne88,"
"LIrownne88," "BeIng-Lowurd-deuLI") u8 ExI8LenzIuIIen. The cutegory oI uothenticity demunds thut the ontologicul
stroctores oI Being und Time receive pructicul or ontic IolIillment; thut is, the reulizution oI
these cutegoriul determinutions in uctoul, concrete liIe contexts is essentiul to the coherence oI
the Heideggeriun project. TII8 concI:8Ion IoIIow8 oI nece88ILy Irom LIe nuL:re oI LIe cuLegory oI u:LIenLIcILy IL8eII: it woold be
nonsensicul to speuk oI un "uothentic usein" thut wus onreulized, exI8LIng In u 8LuLe oI mere poLenLIuIILy.
Aothenticity reqoires thut ontic or pructicul choices und involvements-concrete decisions,
engugements, und politicul commitments-become un essentiul Ieutore oI un uothentic existence.

6. Impuct - This leuds to totulituriunism und expluins the relutionship between Heidegger und
Nutionul Sociulism. Aothenticity cun be osed to jostiIy u spiritoul mission to role those who
uren't cupuble oI living uothentic lives. This proves the Alt will be misuppropriuted.
Wolin, qo - DI8LIng:I8Ied !roIe88or oI HI8Lory uL LIe CILy UnIver8ILy oI New York Grud:uLe CenLer - 1qqo
(RIcIurd WoIIn, TIe !oIILIc8 oI BeIng, !. q6)

The politicul philosophicul implicutions oI this theory ure us oneqoivocul us they ure distusteIol
to u democrutic sensibility. On the busis oI the philosophicul unthropology ootlined by
Heidegger, the modern conception oI popolur sovereignty becomes u sheer non seqoitor: Ior
those who dwell in the poblic sphere oI everyduyness ure viewed us essentiully incupuble oI selI-
role. Insteud, the only viuble politicul philosophy thut Iollows Irom this stundpoint woold be
bruzenly elitist: since the mujority oI citizens remuin incupuble oI leuding meuningIol lives
when leIt to their own devices, their only hope Ior "redemption" lies in the imposition oI u
"higher spiritoul mission" Irom ubove. Indeed, this wus the explicit politicul conclosion druwn
by Heidegger in 1q. In this wuy, Heidegger's politicul thooght moves precurioosly in the
direction oI the "Iohrerprinzip" or "leudership principle." n e88ence, he reiterutes, In keepIng wILI u
cIurucLerI8LIc unLImodern -Iu8, u 8LruLegem druwn Irom !IuLonIc poIILIcuI pIIIo8opIy: since the mujority oI men und women ure
incupuble oI roling themselves insoIur us they ure driven by the buse purt oI their sools to seek
uIter inIerior sutisIuctions und umosements, we in eIIect do them u service by roling them Irom
ubove.;;To duLe, Iowever, LIere Iu8 never -een u 8uLI8IucLory un8wer Lo LIe q:e8LIon Murx po8e8 concernIng 8:cI LIeorIe8 oI ed:cuLIonuI
dIcLuLor8IIp: "WIo 8IuII ed:cuLe LIe ed:cuLor?

S[ Churles Lui
,. Perm - do the plun und ull purts oI the ulternutive thut uren't rejection.
A. The Perm tests the Iuct thut the plun is jost u response to u purticolur disclosore oI being thut
reqoires u certuin politicul engugement. Proves not motoully exclosive.
B. The Perm does the sume thing the Alt does bot uvoids ull oI oor torns - it prescribes u certuin
uothentic mode oI being bot it tethers the thooght-pructice to the plun und recognizes the limits
oI its ontologicul horizon. This is better thun ucting us some empty vessel Ior u new Iuscism the
Bosh udministrution cun cook op.
$Iuvoj Zizek, $enIor Re8eurcIer uL LIe n8LIL:Le Ior $ocIuI $cIence8 In j:-Ijunu, 1qqq |TIe TIckII8I $:-jecL, p.
1-1|

Apropo8 oI LII8 precI8e poInL, my8eII r:n InLo my IIr8L Lro:-Ie wILI HeIdegger (8Ince -egun u8 u HeIdeggerIun - my IIr8L p:-II8Ied Iook wu8 on
HeIdegger und Iung:uge). WIen, In my yo:LI, wu8 -om-urded -y LIe oIIIcIuI Comm:nI8L pIIIo8opIer8' 8LorIe8 oI HeIdegger'8 NuzI engugemenL, LIey
IeIL me ruLIer coId; wu8 deIInILeIy more on LIe 8Ide oI LIe Y:go8Iuv HeIdeggurIun8. AII oI u 8:dden, Iowever, -ecume uwure oI Iow LIe8e Y:go8Iuv
HeIdeggurIun8 were doIng exucLIy LIe 8u:ce LIIng wILI re8pecL Lo LIe Y:go8Iuv IdeoIogy oI 8eII-munugemenL u8 HeIdegger IIm8eII dId wILI re8pecL Lo
NuzI8m: In ex-Y:go8IuvIu, HeIdeggerIun8 enLerLuIned LIe 8ume um-Ig:o:8Iy u88erLIve reIuLIon8IIp Lowurd8 $ocIuII8L 8eII- munugemenL, LIe oIIIcIuI
IdeoIogy oI LIe Comm:nI8L regIme - In LIeIr eye8, LIe e88ence oI 8eII-munugemenL wu8 LIe very e88ence oI modern mun, wIIcI I8 wIy LIe pIIIo8opIIcuI
noLIon oI 8eII-munugemrnL 8:IL8 LIe onLoIogIcuI e88ence oI o:r epocI, wIIIe LIe 8Lundurd poIILIcuI IdeoIogy oI LIe regIme mI88e8 LII8 'Inner greuLne88' oI
8eII-munugemenL ... Heideggeriuns ure thos eternully in seurch oI u positive, ontic politicul system thut
woold come closest to the epochul ontologicul troth, u strutegy which inevitubly leuds to error
{which, oI co:r8e, is ulwuys ucknowledged only reLroucLIveIy, po8L IucL:m, uIter the disustroos ootcome oI
one's engugement). A8 HeIdegger IIm8eII p:L IL, LIo8e wIo curne cIo8e8L Lo LIe OnLoIogIcuI Tr:LI ure condemned Lo err uL LIe onLIc IeveI ... err
u-o:L wIuL? !recI8eIy u-o:L LIe IIne oI 8epuruLIon -eLween onLIc und onLoIogIcuI. The purudox not to be onderestimuted is
thut the very philosopher wIo Ioc:8ed II8 InLere8L on LIe enIgmu oI onLoIogIcuI dIIIerence - who wurned uguin und uguin
uguinst the metuphysicul mistuke oI conIerring ontologicul dignity on some ontic content (God u8
LIe IIgIe8L EnLILy, Ior exumpIe) - Iell into the trup oI conIerring on Nuzism the ontologicul dignity oI 8:ILIng LIe
e88ence oI modern mun. TIe 8Lundurd deIence oI HeIdegger uguIn8L LIe reproucI oI II8 NuzI pu8L con8I8L8 oI Lwo poInL8: noL onIy wu8 II8 NuzI
engugemenL u 8ImpIe per8onuI error (u '8L:pIdILy |D:mmIeIL|', u8 HeIdegger IIm8eII p:L IL) In no wuy InIerenLIy reIuLed Lo II8 pIIIo8opIIcuI projecL; LIe
muIn co:nLer-urg:menL I8 LIuL IL I8 HeIdegger'8 own pIIIo8opIy LIuL enu-Ie8 :8 Lo dI8cern LIe Lr:e epocIuI rooL8 oI modern LoLuIILurIunI8m. However,
whut remuins onthooght here is the hidden complicity between the ontologicul indiIIerence
towurds concrete sociul 8y8Lem8 (cupILuII8m, u8cI8m. Comm:nI8m), In 8o Iur u8 LIey uII -eIong Lo LIe 8ume IorIzon oI modern LecInoIogy,
und the secret privileging oI u concrete sociopoliticul model (NuzI8m wILI HeIdegger, Comm:nI8m wILI 8ome
'HeIdeggerIun MurxI8L8') u8 cIo8er Lo LIe onLoIogIcuI Lr:LI oI o:r epocI. Here one 8Io:Id uvoId LIe Lrup LIuL cu:gIL HeIdegger'8 deIender8, wIo dI8mI88ed
HeIdegger`8 NuzI engugemenL u8 8ImpIe un unomuIy, u IuII InLo LIe onLIc IeveI, In -IuLunL conLrudIcLIon Lo II8 LIo:gIL, wIIcI LeucIe8 :8 noL Lo conI:8e
onLoIogIcuI IorIzon wILI onLIc cIoIce8 (u8 we Iuve uIreudy 8een, HeIdegger I8 uL II8 8Lronge8L wIen Ie demon8LruLe8 Iow, on u deeper 8Lr:cL:ruI IeveI,
ecoIogIcuI, con8ervuLIve, und 8o on, oppo8ILIon8 Lo LIe modern :nIver8e oI LecInoIogy ure uIreudy em-edded In LIe IorIzon oI wIuL LIey p:rporL Lo rejecL:
LIe ecoIogIcuI crILIq:e oI LIe LecInoIogIcuI expIoILuLIon oI nuL:re :ILImuLeIy Ieud8 Lo u more 'envIronmenLuIIy 8o:nd' LecInoIogy. eLc.). HeIdegger dId noL
enguge In LIe NuzI poIILIcuI projecL 'In 8pILe oI' II8 onLoIogIcuI pIIIo8opIIcuI upproucI, -:L -ecu:8e oI IL; LII8 engugemenL wu8 noL '-eneuLI' II8
pIIIo8opIIcuI IeveI - on LIe conLrury II one I8 Lo :nder8Lund HeIdegger, LIe key poInL I8 Lo gru8p LIe compIIcILy (In HegeIe8e: '8pec:IuLIve IdenLILy')
-eLween LIe eIevuLIon u-ove onLIc concern8 und LIe pu88IonuLe 'onLIc' NuzI poIILIcuI engugemenL. One cun now 8ee LIe IdeoIogIcuI Lrup LIuL cu:gIL
HeIdegger: wIen Ie crILIcIze8 NuzI rucI8m on -eIuII oI LIe Lr:e 'Inner greuLne88' oI LIe NuzI movemenL, Ie repeuL8 LIe eIemenLury IdeoIogIcuI ge8L:re oI
muInLuInIng un Inner dI8Lunce Lowurd8 LIe IdeoIogIcuI LexL - oI cIuImIng LIuL LIere I8 8omeLIIng more -eneuLI IL, u non-IdeoIogIcuI kerneI: IdeoIogy exerL8
IL8 IoId over :8 -y meun8 oI LII8 very In8I8Lence LIuL LIe Cu:8e we udIere Lo I8 noL 'mereIy' IdeoIogIcuI. $o wIere I8 LIe Lrup? WIen LIe dI8uppoInLed
Heidegger L:rn8 uwuy Irom ucLIve engugemenL In LIe NuzI movemenL, Ie doe8 8o -ecu:8e LIe NuzI movemenL dId noL muInLuIn LIe IeveI oI IL8
'Inner greuLne88', -:L IegILImIzed IL8eII wILI Inudeq:uLe (rucIuI) IdeoIogy. n oLIer word8, wIuL Ie expected Irom IL wu8 thut it shoold
legitimize itselI throogh direct uwureness oI its 'inner greutness'. And LIe pro-IemIIe8 In LII8 very expecLuLIon LIuL
u poIILIcuI movemenL LIuL wIII dIrecLIy reIer Lo IL8 II8LorIco-onLoIogIcuI Io:nduLIon I8 po88I-Ie. This expectution,
Iowever, is In IL8eII proIo:ndIy metuphysicul, In 8o Iur us it Iuils to recognize thut the gup sepuruting the direct
ideologicul legitimizution oI u movement Irom its 'inner greutness' {its historico-ontologicul
essence) is constitotive, u positive condition oI its 'Ionctioning'. To :8e LIe Lerm8 oI LIe IuLer HeIdegger,
ontologicul insight necessurily entuils ontic blindness und error, und vice versu - LIuL I8 Lo 8uy, In order Lo
-e 'eIIecLIve' uL LIe onLIc IeveI, one m:8L dI8regurd LIe onLoIogIcuI IorIzon oI one'8 ucLIvILy. (n LII8 8en8e, HeIdegger empIu8Ize8 LIuL '8cIence doe8n'L
LIInk' und LIuL, Iur Irom -eIng IL8 IImILuLIon, LII8 Inu-IIILy I8 LIe very moLor oI 8cIenLIIIc progre88.) n oLIer word8, whut Heidegger seems
onuble to endorse is u concrete politicul engugement thut woold uccept its necessury,
constitotive blindness - us iI the moment we ucknowledge the gup sepuruting the uwureness oI
the ontologicul horizon Irom ontic engugement, uny ontic engugement is depreciuted, loses its
uothentic dignity.

q[ Churles Lui

S. No impuct und the ulternutive Iuils - Iither the ulternutive opposes plun und perm solves or
the stutos qoo is overwhelming. on't believe the hype - the plun does not jostiIy "ull Iorms oI
violence. Heidegger's critiqoe is sloppy when it lomps the 1AC together with Western
rutionulism, this mukes the Alt criticully oseless.
Ierry und #enuot, qo - !roIe88or oI !oIILIcuI $cIence uL LIe $or-onne und !roIe88or oI !IIIo8opIy uL
NunLe8 - 1qqo (:c erry und AIuIn Renu:L, eideer cnd Modernit, Lrun8. runkIIn !IIIIp, !. 8;-88)

rom LII8 vIewpoInL, IL I8 IIr8L oI uII cIeur, u8 we Iuve noLed, LIuL this criticism oI technology u8 LIe gIo-uI concreLIzuLIon oI un Ideu oI
mun u8 con8cIo:8ne88 und wIII implies, IIke IL or noL, u deconstroction oI democruLIc remuIn8 on und Ience, In 8ome 8en8e, oI
homunism. L I8 uI8o cIeur, Iowever, LIuL Heidegger's thinking, even IIxed :p LII8 wuy, continoes In 8ome odd wuy to
misIire becuose oI its one-dimensionulity. Jost us, on the strictly philosophicul level, it leuds to
lomping the vurioos Iucets oI modem sobjectivity together in u shupeless muss und to jodging
thut the progression Irom escurtes to Kunt to Nietzsche is lineur und in Iuct inevituble; jost us,
on the politicul level, it leuds to the brotul inclosion oI Americun liberulism in the sume
cutegory with Stulinist totulituriunism. Now LII8 I8 no mere muLLer oI Lu8Le: unyone hus the right to louthe rock
concerL8, isney World, und CuIIIornIu. Nonetheless, no one muy-HunnuI ArendL und eo $Lru:88, wIo IIved In LIe UnILed $LuLe8,
dId noL muke LII8 mI8Luke - identiIy, In LIe nume oI u IIgIer u:LIorILy, the burburism oI the Soviet golugs with the
depruvities oI u Western society whose extruordinury politicul, sociul, und coltorul complexity
ullows ureus oI Ireedom thut it woold be wholly onwurrunted to jodge u priori us mere Iringes
or remnunts oI u world in decline.

1o[ Churles Lui
q. Torn - "Letting things be leuds empiricully leuds to Iuscism - homunism is inevituble, only
the plun sepurutes ends Irom meuns to muintuin un ethicul unchor thut uvoids the pitIulls oI
purulyzing untihomunism.
M:rruy Bookchin, o:nder oI LIe n8LIL:Le Ior $ocIuI EcoIogy und ormer !roIe88or uL Rumupo CoIIege, 1qqg
|Re-encIunLIng H:munILy, p. 168-1;o|

"n8oIur u8 HeIdegger cun -e 8uId Lo Iuve Iud u projecL Lo 8Iupe I:mun IIIewuy8, IL wu8 u8 un endeuvor Lo re8I8L, or 8Io:Id 8uy, dem:r Irom, wIuL Ie
conceIved Lo Ie un uII-encroucIIng LecInocruLIc menLuIILy und cIvIIIzuLIon LIuL rendered I:mun -eIng8 'Inu:LIenLIc' In LIeIr reIuLIon8IIp Lo u
pre8:mu-Iy 8eII-generuLIve reuIILy, 'I8ne88', or more e8oLerIcuIIy, 'BeIng' Sein). NoL :nIIke muny Germun reucLIonurIe8, Heidegger vIewed
'modernILy' wILI IL8 democruLIc 8pIrIL, ruLIonuII8m, re8pecL Ior LIe IndIvId:uI, und LecInoIogIcuI udvunce8 u8 u 'IuIIIng' (GeIuIIen) Irom u prImuI und
nuIve Innocence In wIIcI I:munILy once 'dweIIed,` remnunL8 oI wIIcI Ie -eIIeved exI8Led In LIe r:8LIc worId InLo wIIcI Ie wu8 -orn u cenL:ry ugo.
'A:LIenLIcILy', IL cun -e 8uId wILIo:L uny pIIIo8opIIcuI IrIII8, Iuy In LIe prI8LIne Te:LonIc worId oI LIe LrI-uI Germun8 wIo reLuIned LIeIr LIe8 wILI 'LIe
God8`, und wILI IuLer peopIe8 wIo 8LIII LrIed Lo no:rI8I LIeIr pu8L umId8L LIe -IIgILed LruIL8 oI LIe modern worId. $Ince 8ome u:LIor8 Lry Lo m:ddy
HeIdegger'8 preIup8urIun me88uge -y Ioc:8Ing on II8 u88:med -eIIeI In IndIvId:uI Ireedom und IgnorIng II8 IuLred oI LIe rencI RevoI:LIon und IL8
eguIILurIun, 'Ierd'-IIke democrucy oI LIe 'TIey', IL I8 worLI empIu8IzIng LIuL 8:cI u vIew wILIer8 m LIe IIgIL oI II8 denIuI oI IndIvId:uIILy. TIe
IndIvId:uI -y IIm8eII co:nL8 Ior noLIIng', Ie decIured uILer -ecomIng u mem-er oI LIe NuLIonuI $ocIuII8L purLy In 1q. 'TIe IuLe oI o:r VoIk m IL8
8LuLe co:nL8 Ior everyLIIng.'
zz
A8 u mem-er oI LIe NuzI purLy, wIIcI Ie remuIned :p Lo LIe deIeuL oI Germuny LweIve yeur8 IuLer, II8 unLII:munI8m
reucIed 8LrIdenL, oILen -IuLunLIy reucLIonury proporLIon8. NewIy uppoInLed u8 LIe recLor oI LIe UnIver8ILy oI reI-:rg :pon HILIer'8 u8cenL Lo power,
Ie reudily udopted the Ioehrer-principle oI Germun Iuscism und preIerred LIe LILIe #eltor-Iuhrer, huiling
the spirit oI Nutionul Sociulism us un untidote to 'the durkening oI the world, LIe IIIgIL oI LIe god8, LIe
de8Lr:cLIon oI LIe eurLI |-y LecInoIogy|, LIe Lrun8IormuLIon oI men InLo u mu88, LIe IuLred und 8:8pIcIon oI everyLIIng Iree und creuLIve
.`z8
HI8 mo8L
:n8uvory remurk8 were dIrecLed In LIe IecL:re8, Irom wIIcI LIe8e IIne8 ure Luken, 'Irom u meLupIy8IcuI poInL oI vIew', uguIn8L 'LIe pIncer8' creuLed -y
AmerIcu und R:88Iu LIuL LIreuLen Lo 8q:eeze 'LIe IurLIermo8L corner oI LIe gIo-e ... -y LecInoIogy und ... economIc expIoILuLIon.'
zq
TecInoIogy, u8
HeIdegger con8Lr:e8 IL, I8 'no mere meun8. TecInoIogy I8 u wuy oI reveuIIng. I we gIve Ieed Lo LII8, LIen unoLIer wIoIe reuIm Ior LIe e88ence oI
LecInoIogy wIII open IL8eII :p Lo :8. L I8 LIe reuIm oI reveuIIng, I.e., oI Lr:LI.`
o
AILer wIIcI HeIdegger roII8 o:L LecInoIogy'8 Lrun8IormuLIon8, Indeed
m:LuLIon8, wIIcI gIve rI8e Lo u mood oI unxIeLy und IInuIIy I:-rI8, unLIropocenLrIcILy, und LIe mecIunIcuI coercIon oI LIIng8 InLo mere o-jecL8 Ior
I:mun :8e und expIoILuLIon. HeIdegger'8 vIew8 on LecInoIogy ure purL oI u Iurger weILun8cIu::ng wIIcI I8 Loo m:ILIcoIored Lo dI8c:88 Iere, und
demund8 u degree oI InLerpreLIve eIIorL we m:8L Iorgo Ior LIe pre8enL In LIe conLexL oI u crILIcI8m oI LecInopIo-Iu. $:IIIce IL Lo 8uy LIuL LIere I8 u
good deuI oI prImILIvI8LIc unImI8m In HeIdegger'8 LreuLmenL oI LIe 'reveuIIng' LIuL occ:r8 wIen techne I8 u 'cIeurIng' Ior LIe 'expre88Ion' oI u cruILed
muLerIuI - noL :nIIke LIe E8kImo 8c:IpLor wIo -eIIeve8 (q:ILe wrongIy, muy udd) LIuL Ie I8 '-rIngIng o:L' u IIdden Iorm LIuL IIe8 In LIe wuIr:8 Ivory
Ie I8 curvIng. B:L LII8 I88:e m:8L -e 8een more u8 u muLLer oI meLupIy8Ic8 LIun oI u 8pIrIL:uIIy cIurged LecInIq:e. TI:8, wIen HeIdegger pruI8e8 u
wIndmIII, In conLru8L Lo LIe 'cIuIIenge' Lo u LrucL oI Iund Irom wIIcI LIe 'Iu:IIng o:L oI couI und ore' I8 8:-jecLed, Ie I8 not -eIng 'ecoIogIcuI'.
HeIdegger I8 concerned wILI u wIndmIII, noL u8 un ecoIogIcuI LecInoIogy, -:L more meLupIy8IcuIIy wILI LIe noLIon LIuL 'IL8 8uII8 do Indeed L:rn In LIe
wInd; LIey ure IeIL enLIreIy Lo LIe wInd'8 -IowIng'. TIe wIndmIII 'doe8 noL :nIock energy Irom LIe uIr c:rrenL8, In order Lo 8Lore IL'.
1
Ike mun In
reIuLIon Lo BeIng, IL I8 u medI:m Ior LIe 'reuIIzuLIon' oI wInd, noL un urLIIucL Ior ucq:IrIng power. Bu8IcuIIy, this interpretution oI u
technologicul interrelutionship reIlects u regression - 8ocIuIIy und p8ycIoIogIcuIIy u8 weII u8 meLupIy8IcuIIy - into
qoietism. HeIdegger udvunce8 u me88uge oI pu88IvILy or pu88IvILy conceIved u8 u I:mun ucLIvILy, un endeuvor Lo IeL LIIng8 -e und 'dI8cIo8e'
LIem8eIve8. 'Letting things be' woold be little more thun u trite Muoist und Boddhist precept were
it not thut Heidegger us u Nutionul Sociulist becume ull too ideologicully enguged, ruther thun
'letting things be', when he wus bosily ondoing 'intellectoulism,' democrucy, und techno-
logicul intervention into the 'world'. Con8IderIng LIe LIme, LIe pIuce, und LIe u-8LrucL wuy In wIIcI HeIdegger LreuLed
I:munILy'8 'uII' InLo LecInoIogIcuI 'Inu:LIenLIcILy` - u 'uII` LIuL Ie, IIke EII:I, regurded u8 InevILu-Ie, uI-eIL u meLupIy8IcuI, nIgILmure - it is not
hurd to see why he coold triviulize the Holocuost, when he deigned to notice it ut ull, us purt
oI u techno-indostriul 'condition'. 'AgrIc:IL:re I8 now u moLorIzed 2otorsierte) Iood Ind:8Lry, In e88ence LIe 8ume u8 LIe
mun:IucL:rIng oI corp8e8 In LIe gu8 cIum-er8 und exLermInuLIon cump8,' Ie coIdIy o-8erved, 'LIe 8ume u8 LIe -Iockude und 8LurvuLIon oI LIe
co:nLry8Ide, LIe 8ume u8 LIe prod:cLIon oI LIe Iydrogen -om-8.`
z
In plucing the indostriul meuns by which muny
Jews were killed beIore the ideologicul ends thut goided their Nuzi exterminutors, Heidegger
essentiully displuces the burburism oI u speciIic stute uppurutos, oI which he wus u purt, by
the technicul proIiciency he cun uttribote to the world ut lurge TIe8e Immen8eIy reveuIIng oIIIunded remurk8,
druwn Irom u 8peecI Ie guve In Bremen m 1qqq, ure -eneuLI conLempL. B:L LIey poInL Lo u wuy oI LIInkIng LIuL guve un u:Lonomy Lo LecInIq:e LIuL
Iu8 IeurI:I moruI con8eq:ence8 wIIcI we ure IIvIng wILI LIe8e duy8 In LIe nume oI LIe 8ucred, u pIru8eoIogy LIuL HeIdegger wo:Id IInd very
congenIuI were Ie uIIve Loduy. ndeed, technophobiu, IoIIowed Lo IL8 IogIcuI und cr:deIy prImILIvI8LIc concI:8Ion8, Iinully devolves
into u durk reuctionism - und u purulyzing qoietism. Ior iI oor conIrontution with
civilizution torns on pussivity beIore u 'dI8cIo8Ing oI BeIng`, u mere 'dweIIIng` on LIe eurLI, und u 'letting things be',
Lo :8e HeIdegger`8 ver-Iuge - m:cI oI wIIcI Iu8 8IIpped InLo deep ecoIogy`8 vocu-:Iury u8 weII - the choice between sopporting
burburism und enlightened homunism hus no ethicul Ioondutions to sostuin it. Ireed oI
vuloes groonded in objectivity, we ure lost in u qousi-religioos untihomunism, u spiritoulity
thut cun with the sume eqounimity heur the cry oI u bird und ignore the ungoish oI six million
once-living people who were pot to deuth by the Nutionul Sociulist stute.

11[ Churles Lui
1o. ooble-bind - Heidegger osed his ontology to critiqoe unti-Semitism, bot only by
recognizing the beneIits oI homunism, which jostiIies the plun's upprouch to the world. The
ulternutive is u Iunuticul hutred oI modernity thut mukes the nutionulist myth possible.
Ierry und #enuot, qo - !roIe88or oI !oIILIcuI $cIence uL LIe $or-onne und !roIe88or oI !IIIo8opIy uL
NunLe8 - 1qqo (:c erry und AIuIn Renu:L, eideer cnd Modernit, Lrun8. runkIIn !IIIIp, !. 1o;-1o8)

WIuLever I8 Lr:e oI LII8 de-uLe, wIIcI, IL wIII -e reudIIy ugreed, Iere remuIn8 open, one LIIng I8 8LIII cerLuIn. Heidegger is not close to
Nuzism becuose he remuined u prisoner oI homunism, nor -ecu:8e oI II8 deII-eruLIon8 u-o:L u:LIenLIcILy und LIe
dI8LIng:I8IIng properLy oI mun. Ior Heidegger, the distingoishing property oI mun is ulwuys trunscendence,
und on the contrury, it wus in the nume oI this trunscendence und thos becuose he wus still u
homunist thut Heidegger coold criticize the biologizing reiIicutions oI Nuzi unti-Semitism. More
generuIIy, it is very m:cI in the nume oI homunism LI:8 :nder8Lood, in the nume oI thut strictly homun
cupucity to wrench oneselI Iree oI nutorul determinutions, thut u criticism oI the rucist
imuenution (In LIe ucunIun 8en8e) is possible. When, Iowever, Heidegger muke8 LIe de8LIny oI BeIng LIe de8LIny oI mun, wIen
Ie LI:8 retorns to the untihomunist ideu oI u truditionul code (II onIy LIuL oI LIe II8Lory oI BeIng), he Io:nder8 In
Inu:LIenLIcILy, und II8 Iull mukes possible the retorn oI the nutionulistic myth und the Iunuticul hutred
oI modernity.

#ANOM PI#M SOLVINCY
1[ Churles Lui
Perm Solvency-Good Eco-Management
%he hands-off' approach of the alt isn't enough to guarantee alt solvency.

ohn arry, ProIessor oI Politics, Keele. 1999. Rethinking Green Politics.

As lndlcaLed ln Lhe lasL secLlon ma|nta|n|ng eco|og|ca| d|vers|ty w|th|n soc|a|env|ronmenta| re|at|ons requ|res act|ve soc|a|
|ntervent|on
Added Lo Lhls ls Lhe conLroversy over Lhe whole ldea LhaL dlverslLy and ecosysLem complexlLy are poslLlvely relaLed Lo
ecosysLem sLablllLy Accordlng Lo Clark and conLrary Lo popular percepLlon 1he hlghesL dlverslLy of specles Lends Lo occur
noL ln Lhe mosL sLable sysLems buL lon Lhose sub[ecL Lo consLanL dlsLurbance eg ralnforesLs sub[ecL Lo desLrucLlon by sLorm
and rocky lnLerLldal reglons buffeLed by heavy surf (1992 42) Cne lmpllcaLlon of Lhls ls LhaL |f b|od|vers|ty |s a des|red va|ue
th|s may |mp|y human |ntervent|on |n ecosystems Lo malnLaln hlgh degrees of blodlverslLy perhaps by d|sturb|ng
ecosystems |n the requ|s|te manner 17 Cf Lhe many concluslons one can draw from Lhls perhaps Lhe mosL lmporLanL ls LhaL
a handsoff approach may not guarantee the types of ecosystems that many deep greens des|re Lcosystems
characLerlzed by dlverslLy balance and complexlLy may have to be act|ve|y created and managed 1he normat|ve
standpo|nt from wh|ch to v|ew soc|a| |mpacts on the env|ronment |s noL a handsoff poslLlon whlch frames Lhe lssue of Lhe
relaLlon beLween socleLy and envlronmenL ln Lerms of use and nonuse buL raLher LhaL proposed ln Lhe lasL chapLer as the
eth|cs of use wh|ch attempts to d|st|ngu|sh use from abuse Cnce Lhls eLhlcal lssue has been seLLled eco|og|ca| sc|ence
can then be used to he|p d|st|ngu|sh good from bad eco|og|ca| management le susLalnablllLy from unsusLalnablllLy 1he
Lype of soclal regulaLlon lmplled by collecLlve ecologlcal managemenL lnvolves Lhe normaLlve consLralnlng of permlsslble
pollcy opLlons We could lmaglne Lhls as Lhe democraLlc characLer of collecLlve ecologlcal managemenL lL ls noL LhaL each
soclalenvlronmenLal lssue ls Lo be dealL wlLh by all clLlzens Laklng a voLe on Lhe lssue raLher lL ls LhaL clLlzens (as opposed Lo
bureaucraLs and experLs) can parLlclpaLe ln whaL !acobs (1996 13) calls declslonrecommendlng raLher Lhan declslon
maklng lnsLlLuLlons 1haL ls such forms of popular democraLlc parLlclpaLlon lay ouL Lhe parameLers of use and abuse ln
parLlcular cases LhaL ls Lhe normaLlve bounds of envlronmenLal managemenL whlch can Lhen be carrled ouL Lhrough sLaLe
lnsLlLuLlons
1[ Churles Lui
Perm Solvency-Local Opposition
fforts to shift away from ecological modernization need external stimulus and help, especially from the
state.

avid Pepper, ProIessor oI Geography at OxIord Brookes University. 12/1/99. 'Ecological modernisation or
the 'ideal model' oI sustainable development? Questions prompted at Europe's periphery, Environmental
Politics, Vol.8, No.4, pp.1-34, pub. Frank Cass, London.

-one of wh|ch |s to suggest that adopt|ng the mode| wou|d be unprob|emat|c klrby recalls how past strugg|es by
marg|na||sed commun|t|es ln lreland have been p|ecemea| and fragmented As lrledmann 1992 138 noLes attempts at
endogenous deve|opment are ||ke|y to f|ounder w|thout externa| st|mu|us and he|p perhaps part|cu|ar|y from the state
8uL Lhe lrlsh sLaLe obsLrucLed one of Lhe mosL noLable aLLempLs Lo esLabllsh LhaL economlc auLonomy whlch loLopoulos
rlghLly ldenLlfles as cruclal when lL opposed Lhe communlsLlc plans of Lhe Clencolumbcllle (Co uonegal) Communal larmlng
CooperaLlve ln Lhe 1960s Lo pool labour and rlghLs Lo use local land 1ucker undaLed Such oppos|t|on |s |ndeed ||ke|y to be
tr|ggered by attempts to pract|ce IM s|nce the mode| |s fundamenta||y |ncompat|b|e w|th and often overt|y ant|pathet|c to
cap|ta||st dynam|cs (wheLher Lhere are roles wlLhln lL for local markeLs and a decenLrallsed sLaLe consLlLuLe open quesLlons
vlgorously debaLed amongsL lMs proponenLs) lL ls Lhls raLher Lhan anLlmodernlsL senLlmenLs whlch malnly dlsLlngulshes lM
from 8arrys collecLlve ecologlcal managemenL Lang and Plnes new proLecLlonlsm ChrlsLoffs sLrong LM or lrledmanns
1992 alLernaLlve developmenL 1hese could all be descrlbed as slLuaLed around Lhe [uncLlon beLween sLrong susLalnablllLy
and Lhe ldeal model ln 8aker eL a/s ladder buL dlsLlngulshable from lM because Lhey appear Lo accepL global markeLlsaLlon
as a facL lrledmann 1992 seeklng Lo resLraln lL Lhrough lnLervenLlon lL also follows from mosL of Lhe analyses revlewed
here LhaL Lhe ldeal model ls noL llkely Lo be susLalnable on lLs own lL cannoL be applled Lo perlpherles unless lL also applles
Lo cores slnce one of lLs ma[or funcLlons ls Lo ellmlnaLe cores and perlpherles Correspondlngly currenL aLLempLs wlLhln
ecologlcal modernlsaLlon Lo encourage communlLyled Su ln Lu perlpherles vla boLLomup democraLlc rural lnlLlaLlves are
arguably fuLlle lor Lhey Lake as read Lhe wlder conLexL of Lhe Slngle MarkeL seL wlLhln a global markeL wlLh Lhelr lrreslsLlble
forces for concenLraLlng economlc power Lxpect|ng the |dea| mode| to deve|op by stea|th |n th|s context cou|d |tse|f be
Utop|an

1q[ Churles Lui
Perm Solvency-Ontological lindness
The search for ontological truth fails because we allow atrocities to continue- we must use rationality to
improve the status quo but remain critical of our process.

Slavoj izek, Senior Researcher at the Institute Ior Social Sciences in Ljubljana, 1999. The Ticklish Subject, p.
13-15.

Apropos of Lhls preclse polnL l myself run lnLo my flrsL Lrouble wlLh Peldegger (slnce l began as a Peldeggerlan my flrsL
publlshed hook was on Peldegger and language) When ln my youLh l was bombarded by Lhe offlclal CommunlsL
phllosophers sLorles of Peldeggers nazl engagemenL Lhey lefL me raLher cold l was deflnlLely more on Lhe slde of Lhe
?ugoslav Peldeggarlans All of a sudden however l became aware of how Lhese ?ugoslav Peldeggarlans were dolng exacLly
Lhe sauce Lhlng wlLh respecL Lo Lhe ?ugoslav ldeology of selfmanagemenL as Peldegger hlmself dld wlLh respecL Lo nazlsm ln
ex?ugoslavla Peldeggerlans enLerLalned Lhe same amblguously asserLlve relaLlonshlp Lowards SoclallsL self managemenL
Lhe offlclal ldeology of Lhe CommunlsL reglme ln Lhelr eyes Lhe essence of sellmanagemenL was Lhe very essence of
modern man whlch ls why Lhe phllosophlcal noLlon of selfmanagemrnL sulLs Lhe onLologlcal essence of our epoch whlle Lhe
sLandard pollLlcal ldeology of Lhe reglme mlsses Lhls lnner greaLness of selfmanagemenL e|degger|ans are Lhus eterna||y
|n search of a pos|t|ve ont|c po||t|ca| system that wou|d come c|osest to the epocha| onto|og|ca| truth a sLraLegy wh|ch
|nev|tab|y |eads to error (whlch of course ls always acknow|edged on|y reLroacLlvely posL facLum after the d|sastrous
outcome of ones engagement) As Peldegger hlmself puL lL Lhose who carne closesL Lo Lhe CnLologlcal 1ruLh are
condemned Lo err aL Lhe onLlc level err abouL whaL? reclsely abouL Lhe llne of separaLlon beLween onLlc and onLologlcal
1he paradox noL Lo be underesLlmaLed |s that the very ph||osopher who focused hls lnLeresL on Lhe enlgma of onLologlcal
dlfference who warned aga|n and aga|n aga|nst the metaphys|ca| m|stake of conferr|ng onto|og|ca| d|gn|ty on some ont|c
content (Cod as Lhe hlghesL LnLlLy for example) fe|| |nto the trap of conferr|ng on -az|sm the onto|og|ca| d|gn|ty of su|t|ng
the essence of modern man 1he sLandard defence of Peldegger agalnsL Lhe reproach of hls nazl pasL conslsLs of Lwo polnLs
noL only was hls nazl engagemenL a slmple personal error (a 'sLupldlLy uummhelL as Peldegger hlmself puL lL) ln no way
lnherenLly relaLed Lo hls phllosophlcal pro[ecL Lhe maln counLerargumenL ls LhaL lL ls Peldeggers own phllosophy LhaL
enables us Lo dlscern Lhe Lrue epochal rooLs of modern LoLallLarlanlsm Powever what rema|ns unthought here |s the
h|dden comp||c|ty between the onto|og|ca| |nd|fference towards concrete soc|a| systems (caplLallsm lasclsm Communlsm)
ln so far as Lhey all belong Lo Lhe same horlzon of modern Lechnology and the secret pr|v||eg|ng of a concrete soc|opo||t|ca|
mode| (nazlsm wlLh Peldegger Communlsm wlLh some Peldeggerlan MarxlsLs) as closer Lo Lhe onLologlcal LruLh of our
epoch Pere one should avold Lhe Lrap LhaL caughL Peldeggers defenders who dlsmlssed Peldegger's nazl engagemenL as
slmple an anomaly a fall lnLo Lhe onLlc level ln blaLanL conLradlcLlon Lo hls LhoughL whlch Leaches us noL Lo confuse
onLologlcal horlzon wlLh onLlc cholces (as we have already seen Peldegger ls aL hls sLrongesL when he demonsLraLes how on
a deeper sLrucLural level ecologlcal conservaLlve and so on opposlLlons Lo Lhe modern unlverse of Lechnology are already
embedded ln Lhe horlzon of whaL Lhey purporL Lo re[ecL Lhe ecologlcal crlLlque of Lhe Lechnologlcal explolLaLlon of naLure
ulLlmaLely leads Lo a more envlronmenLally sound Lechnology eLc) Peldegger dld noL engage ln Lhe nazl pollLlcal pro[ecL ln
splLe of hls onLologlcal phllosophlcal approach buL because of lL Lhls engagemenL was noL beneaLh hls phllosophlcal level
on Lhe conLrary lf one ls Lo undersLand Peldegger Lhe key polnL ls Lo grasp Lhe compllclLy (ln Pegelese speculaLlve ldenLlLy)
beLween Lhe elevaLlon above onLlc concerns and Lhe passlonaLe onLlc nazl pollLlcal engagemenL Cne can now see Lhe
ldeologlcal Lrap LhaL caughL Peldegger when he crlLlclzes nazl raclsm on behalf of Lhe Lrue lnner greaLness of Lhe nazl
movemenL he repeaLs Lhe elemenLary ldeologlcal gesLure of malnLalnlng an lnner dlsLance Lowards Lhe ldeologlcal LexL of
clalmlng LhaL Lhere ls someLhlng more beneaLh lL a nonldeologlcal kernel ldeology exerLs lLs hold over us by means of Lhls
very lnslsLence LhaL Lhe Cause we adhere Lo ls noL merely ldeologlcal So where ls Lhe Lrap? When Lhe dlsappolnLed
e|degger Lurns away from acLlve engagemenL ln Lhe nazl movemenL he does so because Lhe nazl movemenL dld noL
malnLaln Lhe level of lLs lnner greaLness buL leglLlmlzed lLself wlLh lnadequaLe (raclal) ldeology ln oLher words whaL he
expected from lL was that |t shou|d |eg|t|m|ze |tse|f through d|rect awareness of |ts |nner greatness And Lhe problem lles ln
Lhls very expecLaLlon LhaL a pollLlcal movemenL LhaL wlll dlrecLly refer Lo lLs hlsLorlcoonLologlcal foundaLlon ls posslble 1h|s
expectat|on however ls ln lLself profoundly meLaphyslcal ln so far as lL fa||s to recogn|ze that the gap separat|ng the d|rect
|deo|og|ca| |eg|t|m|zat|on of a movement from |ts |nner greatness (lLs hlsLorlcoonLologlcal essence) |s const|tut|ve a
pos|t|ve cond|t|on of |ts funct|on|ng 1o use Lhe Lerms of Lhe laLer Peldegger onto|og|ca| |ns|ght necessar||y enta||s ont|c
b||ndness and error and v|ce versa LhaL ls Lo say ln order Lo be effecLlve aL Lhe onLlc level one musL dlsregard Lhe
onLologlcal horlzon of ones acLlvlLy (ln Lhls sense Peldegger emphaslzes LhaL sclence doesnL Lhlnk and LhaL far from belng
lLs llmlLaLlon Lhls lnablllLy ls Lhe very moLor of sclenLlflc progress) ln oLher words what e|degger seems unab|e to endorse
|s a concrete po||t|ca| engagement that wou|d accept |ts necessary const|tut|ve b||ndness as |f the moment we
1g[ Churles Lui
acknow|edge the gap separat|ng the awareness of the onto|og|ca| hor|zon from ont|c engagement any ont|c engagement
|s deprec|ated |oses |ts authent|c d|gn|ty
16[ Churles Lui
Perm Solvency-Fo||t|c|zot|on
very advance in politicization obliges moral reconsideration and reinterpretation of previously calculated
law.

acques errida, French philosopher and Iounder oI econstruction. 1992. Force oI Law: The 'Mystical
Foundation oI Authority. econstruction and the Possibility oI ustice, ed. rucilla Cornell, Michel RosenIeld,
and avid Gray Carlson, p. 28-9. |Takumi Murayama|

1hat [ust|ce exceeds |aw and ca|cu|at|on LhaL Lhe unpresenLable exceeds Lhe deLermlnable cannot and shou|d not serve as
an a||b| for stay|ng out of [ur|d|copo||t|ca| batt|es wlLhln an lnsLlLuLlon or a sLaLe or beLween lnsLlLuLlons or sLaLes and
oLhers LefL Lo lLself the |nca|cu|ab|e and g|v|ng (donaLrlce) |dea of [ust|ce |s a|ways very c|ose to the bad even Lo Lhe worsL
for |t can a|ways be reappropr|ated by the most perverse ca|cu|at|on lLs always posslble And so |nca|cu|ab|e [ust|ce
requ|res us to ca|cu|ate And flrsL closesL Lo whaL we assoclaLe wlLh [usLlce namely law Lhe [urldlcal fleld LhaL one cannoL
lsolaLe wlLhln sure fronLlers buL also ln all Lhe flelds from whlch we cannoL separaLe lL whlch lnLervene ln lL and are no
longer slmply flelds eLhlcs pollLlcs economlcs psychosoclology phllosophy llLeraLure eLc noL only musL we calculaLe
negoLlaLe Lhe relaLlon beLween Lhe calculable and Lhe lncalculable and negoLlaLe wlLhouL Lhe sorL of rule LhaL wouldnL have
Lo be relnvenLed Lhere where we are casL Lhere where we flnd ourselves buL we must take |t as far as poss|b|e beyond the
p|ace we f|nd ourse|ves and beyond the a|ready |dent|f|ab|e zones of mora||ty or po||t|cs or |aw beyond Lhe dlsLlncLlon
beLween naLlonal and lnLernaLlonal publlc and prlvaLe and so on 1hls requlremenL does noL properly belong elLher Lo
[usLlce or law lL only belongs Lo elLher of Lhese Lwo domalns by exceedlng each one ln Lhe dlrecLlon of Lhe oLher
o||t|c|zat|on for example |s |nterm|nab|e even |f |t cannot and shou|d not ever be tota| 1o keep Lhls from belng a Lrulsm or
a LrlvlallLy we musL recognlze ln lL Lhe followlng consequence each advance |n po||t|c|zat|on ob||ges one to recons|der and
so to re|nterpret the very foundat|ons of |aw such as they had prev|ous|y been ca|cu|ated or de||m|ted 1hls was Lrue for
example ln Lhe ueclaraLlon of Lhe 8lghLs of Man ln Lhe abollLlon of slavery ln all Lhe emanclpaLory baLLles LhaL remaln and
wlll have Lo remaln ln progress everywhere ln Lhe world for men and for women noLhlng seems Lo me less ouLdaLed Lhan
Lhe classlcal emanclpaLory ldeal We cannoL aLLempL Lo dlsquallfy lL Loday wheLher crudely or wlLh sophlsLlcaLlon aL leasL noL
wlLhouL LreaLlng lL Loo llghLly and formlng Lhe worsL compllclLles 8uL beyond Lhese ldenLlfled LerrlLorles of [urldlco
pollLlclzaLlon on Lhe grand geopollLlcal scale beyond all selfservlng lnLerpreLaLlons beyond all deLermlned and parLlcular
reapproprlaLlons of lnLernaLlonal law oLher areas musL consLanLly open up LhaL aL flrsL can seem llke secondary or marglnal
areas 1hls marglnallLy also slgnlfles LhaL a vlolence lndeed a Lerrorlsm and oLher forms of hosLageLaklng are aL work (Lhe
examples closesL Lo us would be found ln Lhe area of laws on Lhe Leachlng and pracLlce of languages Lhe leglLlmlzaLlon of
canons Lhe mlllLary use of sclenLlflc research aborLlon euLhanasla problems of organ LransplanL exLrauLerlne concepLlon
bloenglneerlng medlcal experlmenLaLlon Lhe soclal LreaLmenL of AluS Lhe macro or mlcropollLlcs of drugs Lhe homeless
and so on wlLhouL forgeLLlng of course Lhe LreaLmenL of whaL we call anlmal llfe anlmallLy Cn Lhls lasL problem Lhe
8en[amln LexL LhaL lm comlng Lo now shows LhaL lLs auLhor was noL deaf or lnsenslLlve Lo lL even lf hls proposlLlons on Lhls
sub[ecL remaln qulLe obscure lf noL qulLe LradlLlonal)
1,[ Churles Lui
Perm Solvency-Fub||c Fort|c|pot|on
e provide an external stimulus from the state to drive the alt, exposing the issues of the status quo and
raising public interest in environmental ethics.

Alyson lournoy, ProIessor, University oI Florida, Levin College oI Law. Fall 2003. 'Building Environmental
Ethics Irom the Ground Up.

1hus lL Lakes a concerLed efforL Lo ldenLlfy whaL values we are pursulng under our laws lL requlres LhaL we wade Lhrough Lhe
analysls requlred under Lhe relevanL sLaLuLes and regulaLlons for a sLarL 1hen we need Lo look aL how Lhe regulaLlons are
applled and lnLerpreLed by agencles and courLs Lo deLermlne wheLher some values are sysLemaLlcally favored whlle oLhers
are proLecLed ln name only Lawyers and legal scholars already Lyplcally engage ln Lhls Lype of analysls buL only up Lo a polnL
We sLudy how Lhe laws regulaLlons and pollcles are lnLerpreLed and applled and analyze wheLher agency and courL
declslons are based on sound reasonlng WhaL l am suggesLlng ls LhaL Lhls analysls needs an eLhlcal dlmenslon a LranslaLlon
of whaL happens under Lhe law lnLo Lhe language of values 1he challenge such a Lask presenLs ls LhaL lL demands work across
Lhe boundary LhaL dlvldes law and phllosophy 8oLh phllosophers wllllng Lo delve lnLo envlronmenLal law and legal scholars
lnLeresLed ln envlronmenLal eLhlcs wlll need Lo forge Lhe paLh for Lhls work 1he mlsslng analysls would seek Lo deLermlne
whaL values and eLhlcs are embedded ln SecLlon 404 l have suggesLed LhaL we need a deLalled and sysLemaLlc analysls n16
Some may challenge Lhe noLlon LhaL deLalled work ls really necessary lor example Lhose famlllar wlLh SecLlon 404 or wlLh
envlronmenLal phllosophy mlghL be wllllng Lo forgo a close analysls and offer as adequaLe Lhe followlng general
characLerlzaLlon LhaL SecLlon 404 reflecLs predomlnanLly a humancenLered and uLlllLarlan eLhlc LhaL ln general SecLlon
404 employs a balanclng deslgned Lo maxlmlze human good lor purposes of conslderlng wheLher deLalled analysls ls really
necessary leL us assume LhaL Lhls characLerlzaLlon ls generally correcL ln Lhls sense LhaL the va|ues Sect|on 404 advances
are more cons|stent w|th a humancentered ut|||tar|an|sm than w|th any *61 other coherent eth|c (envlronmenLal or noL)
that we can |dent|fy Lven lf Lhls ls an accuraLe generallzaLlon Lhere ls a fundamenLal problem wlLh relylng on Lhls general
characLerlzaLlon as a sLaLemenL of Lhe eLhlc of SecLlon 404 8y vlrLue of lLs efforL Lo capLure SecLlon 404 ln Lhe absLracL
vocabulary of pure phllosophy Lhls characLerlzaLlon ls mlsleadlng lf we look more closely aL SecLlon 404 lL ls qulckly
apparenL LhaL as applled Lhe secLlon lncorporaLes a very lncompleLe calculaLlon of Lhe good kather than ref|ect|ng a pure
and perfect ut|||tar|an|sm |t ref|ects what I ca|| a bounded and |mperfect ut|||tar|an|sm 8y Lhese quallflers l mean LhaL Lhe
analysls ls demonsLrably lnadequaLe on numerous scores lf one lmaglnes a uLlllLarlan calcerulus LhaL lncorporaLes Lhe
lnslghLs of ecology as perfecLly as ls humanly posslble LhaL ls noL Lhe uLlllLarlan calculus we are currenLly performlng
n17
Cur
assessmenL of Lhe beneflLs provlded by weLlands ls severely consLralned by daLa gaps as well as by Lhe llmlLs of our
undersLandlng of complex naLural sysLems 1hls ls no surprlse Lo mosL who sLudy envlronmenLal law CrlLlques LhaL hlghllghL
Lhe flaws of avallable analyLlc Lechnlques are core conLrlbuLlons of legal scholarshlp n18 8uL l submlL LhaL we lack and need
analysls LhaL does more Lhan ldenLlfy Lhe flaws ln regulaLory and [udlclal declslons We need to refocus our attent|on away
from the cons|stency and comp|eteness of regu|atory and |ega| ana|ys|s and onto the va|ues advanced by the f|awed
ana|yt|c techn|ques as they ex|st We need a language Lo express Lhls Lo descrlbe Lhe mlx of values LhaL acLually emerges
from Lhe flawed uLlllLarlan calculus LhaL our laws so ofLen embrace 1hls demands a new vocabulary one LhaL belongs nelLher
Lo phllosophy nor Lo law
n19
hllosophers can make a slgnlflcanL *62 conLrlbuLlon by helplng Lo develop Lhls vocabulary
and lawyers and legal scholars can conLrlbuLe by uslng lL
n20
1he work Lo uncover and arLlculaLe Lhe values embedded ln our
laws represenLs a slgnlflcanL challenge LhaL wlll requlre Lhlnklng LhaL Lranscends dlsclpllnary boundarles work and
dlscusslon fosLered by symposla llke Lhls one C WhaL Can We Caln from unearLhlng Lhe LLhlcs ln LnvlronmenLal Law? Pavlng
descrlbed Lhe Lype of work l advocaLe leL me Lurn Lo Lhe quesLlon of lLs worLh Why do we need a beLLer undersLandlng of
Lhe values embedded ln our laws? Why do we need Lo be able Lo accuraLely descrlbe Lhe mlx of values LhaL SecLlon 404 Lends
Lo proLecL? l conLend LhaL the pub||c and dec|s|onmakers need a better sense of our current bear|ngs |n order to va||date or
|nva||date popu|ar assumpt|ons Conslder Lhe porLralL of SecLlon 404 offered above leL us assume for a momenL LhaL Lhe
mosL accuraLe descrlpLlon of Lhe eLhlc embedded ln lL ls a bounded and lmperfecL humancenLered uLlllLarlanlsm ln oLher
words a uLlllLarlanlsm LhaL does noL fully accounL even for Lhe LoLal value Lo humans of weLlands ConLrasL Lhls wlLh Lhe
publlc narraLlve we Lell abouL SecLlon 404 SecLlon 404 ls wldely vlewed as one of Lhe brlghLesL sLars of Lhe envlronmenLal law
consLellaLlon And rlghLly so WeLlands have whaL we mlghL call mosLfavoredecosysLem sLaLus under our legal reglme
whlle many uplands ecosysLems are lefL relaLlvely unproLecLed 8uL Lhe facL LhaL SecLlon 404 ls one of our sLronger
envlronmenLal laws does noL mean LhaL lL reflecLs any unlquely envlronmenLal values or a unlque way of valulng Lhe
envlronmenL ?eL Lhe pub||c narrat|ve may re|nforce the assumpt|on that env|ronmenta| |aw |s a pure ref|ect|on of some
|nd|st|nct but nob|e set of env|ronmenta| va|ues 1h|s may contrast w|th the rea||ty that our |aws llke SecLlon
404 *63 often protect a w|de array of very trad|t|ona| human va|ues and un|que|y env|ronmenta| va|ues or eth|cs are at
1S[ Churles Lui
best on|y part|a||y ref|ected WhaL lf Lhls ls Lrue broadly? WhaL lf Lhe values proLecLed by our envlronmenLal laws are human
values LhaL dlffer only sllghLly from Lhe values proLecLed by Lhe common law of nulsance cloaked ln Lhe appeallng vell of
envlronmenLallsm? lL ls posslble LhaL lnsLead of an ldenLlLy beLween Lhe values ln our laws and Lhose held by Lhe publlc Lhere
ls a slgnlflcanL dls[uncLure
n21
AL presenL l conLend LhaL lL ls dlfflculL for an experL leL alone a lay person Lo know lf Lhls ls Lhe
case Such |gnorance can |nterfere w|th democrat|c part|c|pat|on 1he easy equat|on of env|ronmenta| |aws and
envlronmenLallsm whlch ls relnforced by our lnablllLy Lo descrlbe accuraLely Lhe values of our laws d|scourages ser|ous
pub||c d|scourse about why we care about the env|ronment lf we do noL ever conslder or dlscuss as a socleLy whaL we value
and why we are llke Lhe rowers l descrlbed aL Lhe sLarL backs lnLo Lhe wlnd rowlng ln unlson wlLh no ldea where we are
headed buL convlnced lL ls where we all mean Lo go A clearer plcLure of Lhe embedded values can correcL any erroneous
assumpLlons and valldaLe accuraLe ones Moreover Lhe dlscourse lnvolved ln provldlng a more accuraLe accounL of Lhe
values proLecLed by our laws may promoLe wlder aLLenLlon Lo Lhe eLhlcal quesLlons challenglng people Lo conslder why Lhey
supporL envlronmenLal proLecLlon 1hus l propose LhaL legal scholars and phllosophers work Lo enhance publlc
undersLandlng of Lhe values embedded ln our laws When members of the pub||c are confronted w|th a c|earer p|cture of
whaL values are advanced by our currenL laws and pollcles they can determ|ne whether or not these |aws comport w|th
the|r eth|ca| |ntu|t|ons lf Lhey flnd LhaL Lhe laws are conslsLenL wlLh Lhelr eLhlcal lnLulLlons we wlll have a sLronger publlc
commlLmenL Lo supporL exlsLlng laws lf noL Lhe publlc can supporL efforLs Lo reform Lhe law ln any dlrecLlon Lo enhance
proLecLlon of nonenvlronmenLal human values llke auLonomy or Lo enhance proLecLlon of Lhe soclal or lnLrlnslc *64 value
of Lhe envlronmenL as Lhey see flL 8eyond Lhe democraLlc beneflLs of beLLer publlc undersLandlng of Lhe values advanced
under our laws Lhls work ls lmporLanL Lo Lhe longLerm efflcacy of envlronmenLal law and pollcy Lngagement w|th
env|ronmenta| |ssues by the pub||c and changes |n |nd|v|dua| and c|v|c behav|or w||| on|y resu|t |f we care about someth|ng
at stake lf as l suggesL Lhe Amerlcan publlc lacks clarlLy abouL whaL lL values abouL Lhe envlronmenL Lhen Lhe publlc ls less
llkely Lo be engaged and responslve on lssues of envlronmenLal pollcy As phllosopher !ames 8achels explalns ln descrlblng
where eLhlcal argumenL leads us As Pume observed when we come Lo Lhe lasL reason we menLlon someLhlng we care
abouL noLhlng can counL as an ulLlmaLe reason for or agalnsL a course of conducL unless we care abouL LhaL Lhlng ln some
way ln Lhe absence of any emoLlonal lnvolvemenL Lhere are no reasons for acLlon 1he facL LhaL Lhe bulldlng ls on flre ls a
reason for me Lo leave only lf l care abouL noL belng burned Lhe facL LhaL chlldren are sLarvlng ls a reason for me Lo do
someLhlng only lf l care abouL Lhelr pllghL
n22
ln shorL un|ess we have a suff|c|ent grasp both of our own va|ues and of how
a |aw or dec|s|on or act|on affects someth|ng we care about we w||| not respond 1he process of galnlng clarlLy of
dlscusslng Lhe values aL sLake may lLself promoLe more reasoned Lhlnklng
n23
De||berat|on may promote eth|ca|
deve|opment
n24
Cne does noL need Lo know how *63 dellberaLlon mlghL affecL Amerlcans vlews on envlronmenLal
values Lo belleve LhaL greaLer LhoughL and aLLenLlon Lo Lhese lssues ls a deslrable end ln lLself 8ecause Lhere ls ulLlmaLely no
reason for any acLlon nor for law LhaL regulaLes acLlon unless we care env|ronmenta| ph||osophy matters for
env|ronmenta| |aw 1he sLeady supporL for lncreased regulaLlon Lo llmlL our lmpacL on Lhe envlronmenL over Lhe pasL LhlrLy
years suggesLs LhaL Amerlcan socleLy does care abouL some values assoclaLed wlLh Lhe envlronmenL If we are to change our
current pattern of conduct w|th regard to the env|ronment lncludlng our acLlon Lhrough governmenL we need both
|nformat|on and mot|vat|on to de||berate Several characLerlsLlcs of envlronmenLal problems Lhelr Lechnlcal complexlLy
Lhe sclenLlflc uncerLalnLy and exLremely long Llme horlzons aLLendlng Lhem and Lhe wlde array of values Lhey engage
dlscourage clear Lhlnklng abouL Lhe relevanL values 1he posslblllLy LhaL a ma[orlLy may wlsh Lo change our currenL paLLerns
makes Lhe efforL Lo clarlfy our Lhlnklng abouL why we care worLhwhlle
1q[ Churles Lui
Perm Solvency-$c|ence |n $oc|o| Context
Combining scientiic representations while acknowledging their social context soles issues o expert knowledge
and instrumentalism.

avid emeritt, epartment oI Geography King`s College London, 6/1/01. 'The Construction oI Global
Warming and the Politics oI Science, Annals oI the Association oI American Geographers, 91(2), p. 307337,
Blackwell Publishers, InIormaWorld.

unforLunaLely pub||c representat|ons of sc|ence se|dom acknow|edge the |rreduc|b|y soc|a| d|mens|on of sc|ent|f|c
know|edge and pract|ce As a resulL d|sc|osure of the soc|a| re|at|ons Lhrough whlch sclenLlflc knowledge ls consLrucLed and
concelved has become grounds for d|scred|t|ng both that know|edge and any pub||c po||cy dec|s|ons based upon |t 1h|s
pollLlcal sLraLegy of soclal consLrucLlon as refuLaLlon has been pursued by the socalled c||mate skept|cs and oLher opponenLs
of Lhe kyoLo roLocol It |s prem|sed upon an |dea||zed v|s|on of sc|ent|f|c truth as the God'seye v|ew from nowhere kather
than accept|ng th|s prem|se and be|ng forced to deny that sc|ent|f|c know|edge ls soclally slLuaLed and conLlngenL the
proper response to |t |s to deve|op a more ref|ex|ve understand|ng of sc|ence as a s|tuated and ongo|ng soc|a| pract|ce as
Lhe basls for a more balanced assessmenL of lLs knowledge A rlcher appreclaLlon for Lhe soclal processes of sclenLlflc
knowledge consLrucLlon ls as lmporLanL for sclenLlsLs Lhemselves as lL ls for wlder publlc credlblllLy of Lhelr knowledge ln Lhe
parLlcular case of cllmaLe change heavy re||ance upon d|verse h|gh|y spec|a||zed and mu|t|d|sc|p||nary bod|es of sc|ent|f|c
know|edge h|gh||ghts the prob|em of trust |n know|edge and the expert systems that produce |t As phenomena Lhe global
cllmaLe and anLhropogenlc changes Lo lL would be dlfflculL even Lo concelve of wlLhouL sophlsLlcaLed compuLer slmulaLlons of
Lhe global cllmaLe sysLem AlLhough saLelllLe monlLorlng sysLems as well as lnsLrumenLal records and paleocllmaLlc evldence
have also been lmporLanL parLlcularly ln Lhe ldenLlflcaLlon of hlsLorlc changes ln Lhe cllmaLe Lo daLe lL ls Lhese powerful
compuLer models LhaL have been declslve ln ldenLlfylng Lhe problem of fuLure anLhropogenlc cllmaLe change and maklng lL
real for pollcy makers and Lhe publlc 2 Crdlnary senses sLruggle ln Lhe face of phenomena so exLenslve ln space and Llme and
lncalculable ln Lhelr poLenLlal lmpacLs lor Lhe soclal LheorlsL ulrlch 8eck (1992) th|s dependence upon sc|ence to make
tang|b|e otherw|se |nv|s|b|e env|ronmenta| r|sks |s character|st|c of what he ca||s the modern r|sk soc|ety
o[ Churles Lui
Ferm $o|vency-$tepp|ng $tone
itizens can't change their mindset radically. Our perm is the only way to garner change in the public and
therefore any solvency for the kritik.


lnlLlally Lhe Lerm envlronmenLallsm may have served as an adequaLe focus for our dlscourse lL capLured and expressed Lhe
publlc deslre Lo embrace a new eLhlc new values and prompLed deep LhoughL abouL our relaLlonshlp wlLh Lhe envlronmenL
8uL Lhe meanlng of Lhe Lerm has been so dlluLed over Llme LhaL commenLaLors have noLed LhaL lL ls now on a par wlLh apple
ple and moLherhood n36 someLhlng mosL people embrace and only a few vlew unsympaLheLlcally n37 1oday
envlronmenLallsm seems Lo suggesL a posLure supporLlve of envlronmenLal laws as Lhey exlsL or wlLh moderaLe reforms lL
may be LhaL env|ronmenta||sm today *69 |acks a core mean|ng d|st|nct from the dom|nant humancentered ut|||tar|an
eth|c
n38
use of the word env|ronmenta||sm does not |ead to thoughtfu| engagement wlLh Lhe eLhlcal and pracLlcal
problems LhaL arlse under Lhe currenL domlnanL eLhlc lL ls a quesLlon mark Loo ofLen used as a perlod Cne mlghL argue LhaL
Lo cure Lhls vold coherenL alLernaLlve Lheorles are needed and LhaL Lhe Lheorybulldlng work belng done by phllosophers ls
Lhe mosL urgenL need Powever lL seems posslble LhaL the |eap requ|red of peop|e |f they are to understand and embrace a
coherent env|ronmenta| eth|c |s too d|ff|cu|t for most g|ven current att|tudes and the ||m|ted pub||c d|scourse about
under|y|ng va|ues CoherenL envlronmenLal eLhlcs are comparLmenLallzed as radlcal and re[ecLed leavlng a vasL undeflned
realm of malnsLream envlronmenLallsm MosL people belleve Lhemselves concerned abouL Lhe envlronmenL even Lhough
LhaL commlLmenL may be one wlLhouL welldeflned conLenL 1o challenge Lhe publlcs comforLable self lmage as
envlronmenLally frlendly we may need concepts that are not so rad|ca||y removed from uLlllLarlanlsm but wh|ch frame
the eth|ca| and pract|ca| shortcom|ngs of our current eth|cs as app||ed to env|ronmenta| prob|ems
n39
ln oLher words
concepLs LhaL show Lhe posslblllLy and value *70 of more ecologlcally enllghLened eLhlcs buL whlch do noL requlre
wholesale accepLance of a radlcally alLered worldvlew may have value n40 A 1owards a new LLhlcal ulscourse SLepplng
SLones 1hls paper emphaslzes Lhe value of an envlronmenLal eLhlcs dlscourse LhaL can reach a wlde segmenL of Lhe publlc
ConcepLs LhaL can frame Lhe eLhlcal lssues ln a more accesslble form may help Lhose who are noL compleLely saLlsfled wlLh
Lhe domlnanL bounded and lmperfecL anLhropocenLrlc uLlllLarlan eLhlcs embedded ln our pollcles and laws 1herefore l
advocaLe developlng concepLs LhaL can serve as polnLs of deparLure from where Lhe ma[orlLy ls Loday concepLs LhaL frame
Lhe eLhlcal lssues ln an accesslble form and offer a new dlrecLlon for Lhose whose eLhlcal lmpulses dlverge from currenL
domlnanL norms
n41
Such concepLs may flll a gap LhaL exlsLs beLween legal scholars work LhaL ls dlrecLed aL lmprovlng
declslonmakers analyLlc Lechnlques and phllosophers work Lo develop coherenL eLhlcal Lheorles Concepts and vocabulary
that draw on both ph||osophy and |aw may be usefu| Lools LhaL wlll help members of Lhe publlc Lo undersLand Lhe full
lmpllcaLlons of currenL laws ln eLhlcal Lerms and Lo ldenLlfy or envlslon pracLlces and pollcles conslsLenL wlLh Lhelr evolvlng
lndlvldual eLhlcal lnLulLlons ueveloplng Lhese concepLs wlll requlre LhaL we broaden Lhe deflnlLlon of approprlaLe work for
lawyers and phllosophers hllosophers conLrlbuLlon cannoL be llmlLed Lo developlng and [usLlfylng a coherenL alLernaLlve
compleLely aparL from humancenLered uLlllLarlanlsm And lawyers conLrlbuLlon cannoL be llmlLed Lo crlLlqulng currenL legal
sLandards or declslonmaklng Lechnlques hllosophers musL help us Lo creaLe a dlscourse LhaL descrlbes ways of valulng Lhe
envlronmenL LhaL bullds on peoples currenL values and lawyers musL analyze Lhe exLenL Lo whlch exlsLlng and proposed laws
are compaLlble wlLh Lhese values ulLlmaLely such concepLs may prove more radlcal ln pracLlce Lhan ecocenLrlc eLhlcal
Lheorles ln LhaL Lhey may enable eLhlcal LransformaLlon LhaL would oLherwlse noL occur MeLaphorlcally we can th|nk of
such concepts as stepp|ng stones ldeas LhaL help people Lo flnd Lhelr way pasL some of Lhe consLralnLs of *71 LradlLlonal
eLhlcs Such concepLs should focus publlc aLLenLlon on Lhe consLralnLs lmposed by LradlLlonal uLlllLarlan eLhlcs and brlng lnLo
vlew Lhe posslblllLy of an eLhlc LhaL addresses Lhese consLralnLs 1hese consLralnLs lnclude lnadequaLe capaclLy Lo deal wlLh
long Llme horlzons uncerLalnLy lnLegraLed declslonmaklng soclal equlLy and values LhaL are noL easlly moneLlzed Stepp|ng
stones unllke a Lrue envlronmenLal eLhlc may noL provlde coherenL and compleLe responses Lo Lhese consLralnLs buL by
maklng Lhe lssues sallenL for Lhe publlc Lhey may represent a necessary step |n any w|despread eth|ca| evo|ut|on Where an
envlronmenLal eLhlc mlghL be descrlbed as requlrlng a leap from currenL domlnanL eLhlcs sLepplng sLones requlre only a
small sLep 1hey lnvlLe conLemplaLlon of change by hlghllghLlng Lhe consLralnLs of currenL eLhlcs buL Lhey do noL demand a
compleLe eLhlcal LransformaLlon 1o be effecLlve a sLepplng sLone musL have broad resonance wlLh Lhe publlc and provlde a
conLexL for confronLlng some of Lhe challenges LhaL any envlronmenLal eLhlc wlll have Lo overcome lncludlng long Llme
horlzons sclenLlflc uncerLalnLy and Lhe llmlLaLlons of Lhe domlnanL economlc framework
n42

1[ Churles Lui
Ferm $o|vency-$usto|nob|||ty
mbracing sustainability prevents reduction to pure cost-benefit analysis while providing a way of
engaging in successful politics and debate based on common values.

A flrsL quesLlon ls how Lo deflne susLalnablllLy 1he mosL wldely accepLed deflnlLlon of susLalnablllLy ls provldlng for Lhe needs
of Lhe presenL wlLhouL compromlslng Lhe ablllLy of fuLure generaLlons Lo meeL Lhelr needs
n46
ueclslons or pollcles are
deemed susLalnable only lf Lhey *73 lncorporaLe conslderaLlon of Lhree coequal facLors ecology economlcs and soclal
equlLy
n47
8ecause of Lhe expllclL focus on human needs Lhe concepL ls compaLlble wlLh anLhropocenLrlsm
n48
Cn lLs face
susta|nab|||ty va|ues the env|ronment and econom|c act|v|ty not |ntr|ns|ca||y but for the|r ut|||ty to humans 1he expllclL
valulng of equlLy among humans ln Lhe allocaLlon of envlronmenLal and economlc beneflLs seems Lo lnLroduce a
complemenLary rlghLsbased approach So whaL ls poLenLlally useful abouL Lhls concepL? llrsL leL me be clear abouL whaL
susLalnablllLy does noL accompllsh lL does noL address Lhe problem LhaL moLlvaLes so much of Lhe work ln envlronmenLal
phllosophy LhaL ls lL does noL expand Lhe communlLy of morally valued enLlLles beyond humans
n49
1o LhaL exLenL |t |s
cons|stent w|th a ca|cu|us of ut|||ty ||ke that emp|oyed under many |aws Loday lL does noL appeal Lo any lnchoaLe non
anLhropocenLrlc lnLulLlons LhaL members of Lhe publlc may possess owever susta|nab|||ty has slx aLLrlbuLes LhaL endow lL
wlLh the potent|a| to expand pub||c d|scourse and Lo help us confronL problems LhaL musL be addressed lf any envlronmenLal
phllosophy ls Lo Lake rooL 8y framlng and focuslng publlc debaLe on Lhese lmporLanL lssues susLalnablllLy may faclllLaLe
fuLure eLhlcal developmenL llrsL Lhe concepL of susta|nab|||ty prov|des an e|egant way to address the cr|t|ca| prob|em of
|ong t|me hor|zons
n30
Legal scholars have done much LhaL shows Lhe fallures of currenL cosLbeneflL meLhodology ln deallng
wlLh long Llme horlzons Scholars have revealed boLh Lhe conLroverslal value cholces abouL Llme horlzons made ln currenL
pollcles and Lhe flawed Lechnlcal analysls someLlmes performed under our *74 currenL laws whlch Lends Lo undervalue
fuLure harms
n31
8uL much of Lhe work ls necessarlly very Lechnlcal and absLracL removed from Lhe concreLe confllcLs LhaL
shape publlc debaLe lL may be crlLlcally lmporLanL LhaL Lhe publlc be engaged dlrecLly wlLh Lhls cenLral moral lssue ln
envlronmenLal pollcy Susta|nab|||ty can provlde an anchor for debaLe abouL Lhe approprlaLe Llme horlzon Lo conslder ln law
and pollcy 1he challenge of exLendlng our eLhlcal horlzon Lo lnclude a longer Llmeframe |s an enormous|y |mportant one for
anyone who cares about the env|ronment under almosL any [usLlflcaLlon for carlng SusLalnablllLy ls a concepL LhaL can
perform Lhls heavy llfLlng luLure generaLlons of humans are fronL and cenLer and musL be consldered 1he quesLlons of how
far lnLo Lhe fuLure we wanL Lo conslder and how we welgh our lnLeresL ln Lhe fuLure agalnsL currenL needs are noL easy 8uL
as 8ryan norLons work shows susLalnablllLy frames Lhe lssue and focuses aLLenLlon on Lhls key value cholce LhaL we musL
make
n32
Second by vlrLue of lLs expllclL focus on envlronmenLal lmpacLs over a long Llme horlzon susta|nab|||ty demands
that we emp|oy the too|s and know|edge of eco|ogy to understand these consequences Cf course Lhe same clalm could be
made of a uLlllLarlan phllosophy accuraLely deLermlnlng Lhe greaLesL good for Lhe greaLesL number demands LhaL we employ
our besL meLhodologles Lo deLermlne Lhe human consequences of our acLlons Powever susta|nab|||ty suggests the need for
an ant|dote to current pract|ces ln Lwo ways llrsL Lhe emphas|s on the env|ronment as an equa| factor of cons|derat|on
alongslde economlcs and equlLy elevaLes Lhe lmporLance of ecologlcal lmpacLs and our analysls of Lhem lurLher
susta|nab|||ty env|s|ons |ntegrated dec|s|onmak|ng a key prerequlslLe Lo lncorporaLlng ecology effecLlvely lnLo declslons
n33

Agaln Lhls ls noL a panacea buL a spoLllghL LhaL can lllumlnaLe Lhe lssues brlnglng Lhem lnLo Lhe publlcs fleld of vlslon 1hlrd
susta|nab|||ty focuses attent|on on the ro|e of uncerta|nty and the eth|ca| |mp||cat|ons of our cho|ces relaLed Lo burdens of
proof Lngaglng people on Lhe sub[ecL of sclenLlflc uncerLalnLy and burdens of proof ls llkely Lo lnduce glazed eyes
susta|nab|||ty prov|des a concrete entry po|nt for |n|t|at|ng pub||c debate on the re|evant mora| quest|ons lnadequaLe daLa
and llmlLed undersLandlng abouL Lhe consequences of *73 human acLlvlLy on Lhe envlronmenL have long been recognlzed
by scholars as serlous challenges Lo developlng effecLlve envlronmenLal pollcy and law no maLLer whaL our eLhlcal sLance we
musL all confronL Lhe cenLral quesLlon of how we oughL Lo deal wlLh uncerLalnLy 1hls ls noL purely a phllosophlcal problem
8uL as a pracLlcal maLLer |f an approach to uncerta|nty |s not embedded |n the eth|ca| framework we app|y then quest|ons
about cop|ng w|th uncerta|nty may be wrong|y re|egated as Lhey ofLen are Loday to the rea|m of techn|ca| quest|ons
removed from pub||c debate and concern SusLalnablllLy has promlse for brlnglng Lhe quesLlon of uncerLalnLy back lnLo Lhe
publlc eye because lL embodles Lhe premlse LhaL all declslons musL preserve opLlons for fuLure generaLlons SusLalnablllLy
reframes Lhe debaLe Lhus lnLroduclng Lhe posslblllLy for a dlfferenL approach Lo uncerLalnLy Lhan LhaL embedded ln currenL
law pollcy and eLhlcs ln place of legal sLandards LhaL demand proof of harm ln Lhe face of uncerLalnLy susLalnablllLy ralses
Lhe posslblllLy LhaL we should assess human declslons Lo see lf Lhey are susLalnable As such Lhe concepL of susLalnablllLy can
expose Lhe slgnlflcanL lssue of how Lo assess Lechnologlcal opLlmlsm ln llghL of whaL ls unknown
n34
8ecause susta|nab|||ty
provldes a poslLlve sLandard agalnsL whlch Lo measure human acLlvlLy lL fac|||tates p|ac|ng the burden of proof of
[ Churles Lui
susta|nab|||ty on those whose act|ons dep|ete resources rather than on those who advocate protect|ve regu|at|on Asklng
wheLher a glven acLlvlLy ls susLalnable redlrecLs Lhe focus from wheLher human acLlvlLy causes harm ln Lhe harm prevenLlon
conLexL Lhe relaLlve concreLeness of Lhe Lerm harm serves Lo focus our aLLenLlon on Lhe lssue of harm as Lhe operaLlve
lnqulry 1hls focus on wheLher harm has occurred glves force Lo Lhe argumenL for placlng Lhe burden of proof (and Lhus of
uncerLalnLy) on Lhose who would prove harm 8ecause susLalnablllLy ls a poslLlve aLLrlbuLe of a declslon a focus on
susta|nab|||ty may |end at |east rhetor|ca| strength to the argument for sh|ft|ng the burden of cop|ng w|th uncerta|nty to
those who seek to [ust|fy the|r act|v|t|es as susta|nab|e
n33
lurLher Lhe lnLernaLlonal dlscourse on
susLalnablllLy *76 whlch has made Lhe precauLlonary prlnclple one of lLs operaLlonal elemenLs also supporLs Lhls shlfL Cf
course [usL as Lhe argumenL ls made under currenL law LhaL lL ls unreasonable Lo ask economlc acLors Lo prove a negaLlve
(LhaL Lhere wlll be no harm Lo healLh or Lhe envlronmenL) Lhere wlll undoubLedly sLlll be clalms LhaL lL ls unreasonable Lo ask
economlc acLors Lo prove such a broad poslLlve (LhaL a declslon ls susLalnable) ln oLher words susLalnablllLy wlll noL
ellmlnaLe conLroversy over pollcles on Lhe burden of proof and how Lo cope wlLh uncerLalnLy 8uL broader adopLlon of Lhe
concepL of susLalnablllLy would remlnd us LhaL Lhls ls a value quesLlon and noL a Lechnlcal lssue lL may Lherefore renew
publlc lnLeresL ln and aLLenLlon Lo Lhe quesLlon of Lhe burden of proof ln llghL of uncerLalnLy lourLh susta|nab|||ty
embraces the rea||ty that a broad array of human va|ues must |nev|tab|y be we|ghed a|ong w|th va|ues assoc|ated w|th the
env|ronment wheLher ln a LradlLlonal or a nonLradlLlonal eLhlcal framework CLher human values do noL slmply dlsappear
when values relaLed Lo lnLeracLlons wlLh Lhe nonhuman envlronmenL appear
n36
8esolvlng confllcLs LhaL exlsL among values ls
perhaps Lhe mosL lmporLanL conLexL ln whlch envlronmenLal values are lnvoked
n37
AdvocaLes on all sldes of envlronmenLal
debaLes may noL always wanL Lo hlghllghL Lhe facL LhaL env|ronmenta| protect|on measures that make us fee| v|rtuous often
serve our se|f|nterest as we|| 8uL Lhe prevalllng polarlzed dlscourse and false dlchoLomles lmpede maLure debaLe abouL
envlronmenLal eLhlcs and may undermlne longLerm supporL for envlronmenLal law Susta|nab|||ty may prov|de an ant|dote
for extreme po|ar|zat|on by recast|ng the debate to emphas|ze that dec|s|ons affect|ng the env|ronment |nev|tab|y affect
other human va|ues SusLalnablllLy makes a vlrLue of Lhls necessary Lenslon by acknowledglng Lhe need Lo conslder oLher
values kecogn|z|ng that env|ronmenta| statutes and an env|ronmenta| wor|dv|ew a|ready |ncorporate rather than exc|ude
these other va|ues |s an |mportant step lncorporaLlon of a broad array of values llnked wlLh a long Llme horlzon ecologlcal
prlnclples and soclal equlLy may have Lremendous power Lo enrlch publlc debaLe 1here ls an obvlous rlsk LhaL comes wlLh
Lhe lncluslon of nonenvlronmenLal human values alongslde envlronmenLal values 1he rlsk ls LhaL desplLe Lhe nomlnal
embraclng of Lhe envlronmenL oLher more *77 easlly quanLlflable values wlll ouLwelgh noneconomlc envlronmenLal
values Many commenLaLors have polnLed ouL Lhls falllng under currenL laws LhaL mandaLe cosLbeneflL analysls lf Lhls
crlLlque of susLalnablllLy proves correcL susta|nab|||ty w||| produce dec|s|ons no d|fferent than those we have today or
worse lor Lhls reason embraclng Lhe broad range of values assoclaLed wlLh susLalnablllLy may [usLlflably be re[ecLed by
many advocaLes ln Lhe polarlzed debaLe on envlronmenLal law and pollcy 8uL the work of ph||osophers sc|ent|sts and |ega|
scho|ars can he|p us avo|d th|s per|| by g|v|ng the concept of susta|nab|||ty mean|ng and prevent|ng |ts d||ut|on
n38
1he flfLh
promlslng aspecL of susta|nab|||ty ls lLs |nc|us|on of soc|a| equ|ty as a th|rd factor to be cons|dered a|ong w|th the
env|ronment and econom|cs 8y lncludlng soclal equlLy susLalnablllLy |ntroduces a human va|ue that alLhough noL
necessarlly ln Lenslon wlLh valulng of Lhe envlronmenL |s often exc|uded from conslderaLlon and lgnored ln envlronmenLal
law and pollcy 1he breadLh and depLh of Lhe envlronmenLal [usLlce movemenL has demonsLraLed Lhe lmporLance of soclal
equlLy ln Lhe allocaLlon of envlronmenLal beneflLs and burdens
n39
SusLalnablllLy lncorporaLes concern abouL envlronmenLal
[usLlce raLher Lhan relegaLlng lL Lo a separaLe domaln llnally there |s one pract|ca| advantage susta|nab|||ty has
access|b|||ty Susta|nab|||ty may be a part|cu|ar|y strong start|ng po|nt from wh|ch to reach peop|e who are |nterested |n
the env|ronment because |t comports w|th peop|es current eth|ca| |ntu|t|ons 8esulLs of a recenL survey showed LhaL Lhe
Lop [usLlflcaLlon people gave for carlng abouL envlronmenLal proLecLlon was Lhe currenL generaLlons responslblllLy Lo fuLure
generaLlons
n60
1he reason selecLed mosL *78 frequenLly as belng a very lmporLanL reason Lo proLecL blodlverslLy was
blodlverslLys value ln provldlng naLural servlces Lo humans
n61
1hus susta|nab|||ty shows promlse as a sLepplng sLone from
currenL eLhlcs and values held by Lhe publlc lL bu||ds both on the ut|||tar|an [ust|f|cat|on most peop|e |dent|fy as foremost
among the|r reasons for car|ng about the env|ronment and on the|r concern for future generat|ons ln addlLlon
susLalnablllLy seems compaLlble wlLh vlews LhaL are grounded ln a sense of rellglous duLy lf Lhe publlc ls broadly commlLLed
Lo proLecLlng Lhe envlronmenL for fuLure generaLlons and for splrlLual reasons as surveys suggesL
n62
Lhe concepL of
susLalnablllLy wlll help clLlzens Lo evaluaLe wheLher cerLaln pollcles and declslons are conslsLenL or lnconslsLenL wlLh wldely
shared values

A2 Heidegger - Weekly Block

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

A2 Heidegger - Weekly Block

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

April gth - A Heidegger Hooston-Memoriul o11-1

Você também pode gostar