https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a Professor James A06 en-us 2020-09-21 18:26:15 UTC 2020-09-22 01:45:04 UTC hello@padlet.com isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/765601764 some adaptive problems including stopping the homeless crisis, and stopping global warming.

skills needed to approach adaptive problems include impartiality, forward thinking and prudence. 

perseverance, a desire to learn, and impartiality are important to being an engineer. ]]> 2020-09-21 18:38:08 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/765601764 isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/765755946 I would not nuke the planet because I would be endangering the lives of potential species that could evolve to be as smart as humanity. Also animals have the right to not be annihilated. 

most people would not nuke the planet because it would result in the deaths of countless innocent animals which is immoral. also to nuke the planet would mean to remove almost all evidence of mankind's existence which would mean our existence was pointless which is not ideal. 

those who would nuke the planet would think that only human lives matter and that nature is ours, so if all of humanity being one last man wished to destroy the world then they can. also there is the argument that the only factors that we should consider are humans so if there will be no more humans then why bother preserving the world.]]> 2020-09-21 19:19:50 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/765755946 isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766084897 I see that there is an inherent value in nature namely its conscious animals and so am closer to nonanthropomorphic, however I do think that we should value nature for our own usage.

We currently have preserved land spaces for wild life, these places are a definite areas that we should not live and maybe never even visit. we should not in my opinion try to colonize the oceans, it will destabilize everything and ruin the already harmed water ecosystems. 

the charter for national parks is nonanthropomorphic because it stops humans from totally colonizing and taking over land but is also anthropomorphic based in its desire to allow citizens to enjoy nature.]]> 2020-09-21 21:28:33 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766084897 isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766102359 we as a species are not like other animals we are able to compound knowledge, no other species can do this and as a result we have the ability to destroy and preserve all life. I believe the idea that we are stewards of nature to be accurate, it is our responsibility to not let our superiority get out of hand and kill all other life forms. 

I see the Judeo-Christian portrayal as being more correct than incorrect, we are defined by our cultures and alone in the wilderness we are not totally human.

if we are one species amongst many others then we should try to conserve nature and interact with it more in a beneficial and more symbiotic way.]]> 2020-09-21 21:39:04 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766102359 isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766366493 I do not know if I will have children, it is something that I had not really thought about. I would assume probably but  am naturally unsure. 

We do have an obligation to other's children, as humans must look after other humans, of course one's own children naturally would be cared for more. 

People do not inherently have a right to experience nature, but nature has the right to exist and thus can be experienced by all. 

One does not have to experience nature in my opinion, but nature must exist for its own sake. we can and are allowed to be om nature but one does not have to if they do not wish to, this experience unnecessary to be an active member of society. ]]> 2020-09-22 00:33:45 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766366493 isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766438476 Nuclear science is the most dangerous kind of technology because it can level entire cities with a single blast, rendering them uninhabitable for hundreds even thousands of years. coal and fuel burning technology is also dangerous but because it byproducts have polluted the planet. 

Nuclear weapons can kill all life on the planet in turn they can highly interact with non human nature. pollution caused by energy production has harmed many animals. 

one version of the precautionary principle states that work should stop if the outcome is unknown which is highly different from the version that states it should be stopped if it could harm individuals. the unknown version is somewhat anti science. there is another that assesses motives rather than means, very unlike the other two which focused on outcomes. ]]> 2020-09-22 01:06:58 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766438476 isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766471693 Cost benefit analysis can be used to address issues that are immediate, noticeable and to some extent reversible.

Fairness is an issue with cost benefit analysis because of how some may work harder and get the same results and in turn receive the same pay despite having worked harder. it can dehumanize individuals treating them as test subjects to an extent. 

this concept is highly anthropomorphic because it cares only for society and its views, while society generally has many non anthropomorphic views that will have affects in this system, this method will inherently effect anthropomorphic issues the most.  ]]> 2020-09-22 01:20:09 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766471693 isaacgardberg https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766513744 I would likely only have one child or simply adopt given the possibility of overpopulation. 

It is unfair that we create so much waste, however our resource use is a privilged right of the western world, and so is very grey in my eyes. 

the issues of fairness can be addressed from many perspectives and will be answered very differently by each. an ethical egoist would say that fairness cannot exist and so there is no issue while a utilitarian would argue that waste caused by unfairness is an objective negative that must be stopped. each of the four ideas of justice will approach fairness differently and come to different conclusions as well, notable fairness and equality justice will support that fairness is an issue but have two different approaches to fixing it while merit may not even acknowledge a problem. ]]> 2020-09-22 01:35:58 UTC https://padlet.com/isaacgardberg/21a1uv6ejv0tj34a/wish/766513744