10 14.1.1 Reasoned Analysis and Empirical Claims
Reasoned Analysis
Question at Issue:
Why is climate change denialism a widespread movement within the United States?
Evidence and Information:
- The creation of the movement
- The main reasons that climate denialism is occurring despite the scientific consensus
- The relationship between human psychology and this behavior
- The historical supporters of climate denialism
- The way that movement has expanded throughout the years
Assumptions:
- Climate change is a real and pressing threat to life on Earth
- Climate deniers do not consider climate change to be real or do not think it is a pressing issue
Concepts:
- The Bandwagon Appeal
- Ingroup Bias
- Misinformation
Context:
- Heavily politically divided nation
- Fossil fuel dominated society
- Traditionalism
- Capitalist society
Point of View:
- Climate scientists
- Politicians
- Psychologists
- Economists
- Denialists
Purpose:
- To determine the reasoning behind climate denialism and use that information to assure climate denialists that climate change is in fact, real
Implications & Consequences:
- By determining what causes people to doubt climate change, that information could be used to convince them to believe in climate change.
Conclusions & Interpretations:
Climate denialism has become a widespread way of thinking due to the heavily divided nature of our political system, as well as the corporate dependency on cheap oil.
Disciplinary Lenses
Psychology
Question at Issue:
How does the human condition promote the spread of climate denialism?
Evidence & Information:
- How information regarding climate change is spread
- If the sources that provide information on climate change come with an inherit bias
- How our current political climate affects the way that people think
Assumptions:
- Physiological phenomena can have greater influence on the mind than reason
- Psychology is a factor regarding how climate change information is spread and interpreted
Concepts:
- Motivated interference
- Denial
- Ingroup bias
Context:
- Psychological history
- Human history
Point of View:
- Psychologists
- Loyal members of a group
Purpose:
- To determine how psychological methods are being used to manipulate people into denying climate change
Implications & Consequences:
- By manipulating the way in which people think, through exploitation of the loyalty they have to their group, leaders can cause changes that favor them.
Conclusions & Interpretations:
People can easily be manipulated with the use of psychological tactics. By making people aware of these tactics hopefully they can become more resistant to them.
Politics
Question at Issue:
How has the political climate of the United States promoted the idea of climate denialism?
Evidence & Information:
- Historical relations between the two political parties of the United States
- Climate change as a talking point in politics
Assumptions:
- Political affiliation influences viewpoints
- The two political parties have different stances on climate change
- Party members typically adhere to the party’s average beliefs
Concepts:
- Party loyalty
- Groupthink
Context:
- Divided and hostile political climate
Point of View:
- Politicians
- Republicans
- Democrats
- Independents
- Voters
Purpose:
- To determine how political affiliation may influence climate denialism
Implications & Consequences:
- The stance of a political party will influence the views of its members.
Conclusions & Interpretations:
Simply by affiliating with a political party, you are likely to be influenced by the overarching beliefs of that party.
Economics
Question at Issue:
How does climate denialism relate to economic gain?
Evidence & Information:
- Expenses and costs of a greener society
- Costs of acknowledging climate change
- Knowing who stands to gain from denying climate change
Assumptions:
- Fossil fuel companies are aware that climate change is harmful
- It is cheaper and more economically advantageous to use fossil fuels
- A change in our current fossil fuel reliant society would be detrimental to those who rely upon it.
Concepts:
- Real costs
- Opportunity costs
- Protection of interests
- Free market
Context:
- Fossil fuel dependent society
- Traditionalism
Point of View:
- Economist
- Fossil Fuel Worker
- Wealthy member of society
- Impoverished member of society
Purpose:
- To determine if financial gain would be a driving factor in the logic of climate denialism
Implications & Consequences:
- By determining that people give more value to their economic situation than the problems that climate change causes, it implies the monetary stability is a powerful source of motivation.
Conclusions & Interpretations:
Economic gain is one of the most powerful forms of motivation that can be placed on a person. In order to convince someone that denies climate change due to economic reasons, they must be given a motivation that goes beyond economic gain or be convinced that there will not be a large economic cost of climate-safe practices.
Empirical Claims
Inductive Reasoning
True Premise 1: News sources such as Fox News deny the reality of climate change.
True Premise 2: The vast majority of the scientific community have conducted independent studies that all confirm the reality of climate change.
Weak Inductive Reasoning: Climate change must be fake because I trust the people that are denying it. (Appeal to Authority)
Logical Conclusion: The evidence in support of the existence of climate change is more strongly supported than the alternative conclusion.
Deductive Reasoning
General Premise 1: Earth’s climate has steadily been warming since the industrial revolution.
General Premise 2: Many scientific studies have drawn a connection between carbon within our atmosphere and a warming planet.
Weak Deductive Reasoning: The Earth has naturally warmed and cooled throughout history. It probably isn’t because of our actions. (Cherry picking)
Logical Conclusion: While the Earth has naturally warmed and cooled in the past, the recent changes in Earth’s climate far outpace any natural phenomenon, therefore it must be from human activity.
Abductive Reasoning
Information: Climate deniers deny the existence of climate change despite the overwhelming evidence.
Best Prediction: Climate deniers do not see the evidence for climate change or the source of the evidence as trustworthy.
Logical Fallacies
Bandwagon Fallacy
The presence of mainstream media that denies climate change leads people to believe that climate change is not real, due to the fact that they see so many other people deny it.
Ad Hominem
Many climate deniers will personally attack climate scientists in an attempt to dissuade viewers from being convinced by them. This can be more clearly exemplified with the vast amount of name-calling that occurs in climate debate.
Cherry Picking
Instead of taking the body of knowledge about climate change as a whole, climate deniers will reference to specific points that do not make sense when included with all other data. For example, the fact that the Earth naturally warms is true, however the current warming of the Earth is very much accelerated and unnatural.
Appeal to Authority
Climate deniers often base their arguments on evidence provided by non-experts (political candidates and news anchors) instead of actual climate experts.