<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Nature and Ethics Activity by Samuel Zadel</title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk</link>
      <description>Made with a quick smile</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2020-09-24 04:21:07 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2020-09-24 20:09:34 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title>Part 1</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774574559</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. -Technical problems are problems that are straightforward, ex. make a plastic water bottle or make a basic flat-screen TV.<br>   - Adaptive challenges require more thought and intrinsically have more controversy attached to the issue. ex. finding a solution to the lack of non-renewable resources, there are many different solutions.<br>2. Extremely good problem solving skills, teamwork, humility, ability to think outside the box.<br>3. Almost the same skills, in addition hard work, high intelligence, determination.<br><br></div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 04:23:49 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774574559</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Part 2</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774589667</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1.  No I would not nuke the earth, Why would I end all life on earth just because I am the last alive? Even if I wanted to end my life at that point, I would not nuke the world in order to accomplish this.<br>2.  Most people say don't nuke it because the rest of life on earth will continue to thrive even after the death of humanity.<br>3. The people who say its okay to nuke probably base their evidence mostly on the fact that humans are the only life on earth with intellect and free will therefore once humans are gone, the rest of the earth does not matter.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 04:32:20 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774589667</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Part 3</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774605210</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. On the Anthropocentric scale I would say that I am not completely Anthropocentric but I am definitely more towards that than non-anthropocentric.  I think that for the most part I would say most of natures value depends on what it can do for humanity.  <br>2. While I am somewhat Anthropocentric I still believe having wilderness is still valuable. I think that it is beneficial to science and for human gratification to have 'wild' areas in the world.<br>3. The charter system shows an intrinsic value in nature, Preserving national parks shows non-anthropocentric values.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 04:40:45 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774605210</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Part 4</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774635318</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. I think that humans are somewhere between being above/having dominion over nature and being equal/one with nature. I believe this because we are different than nature, we can manipulate it how we please and we can think for ourselves while nature cannot. But at the same time, some of the powers of nature are still uncontrollable by humans.<br>2. I think for the most part, the christian view is correct but I think that there are also a few flaws within the view.<br>3.If I agreed that we were one species among many than by going along with this belief I would think that We should stop expanding industrialization into places that are still 'wild'. Also I think it would be important to stop harming the environment with pollution, garbage, etc. </div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 04:58:00 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774635318</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Part 5</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774650250</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. I haven't decided whether I'm having children yet. <br>2. I wouldn't say we have obligations to other peoples children but I feel that we do owe it to others children to not ruin their future in any way .(the environment, livable conditions)<br>3. I feel like if there is opportunity for people to experience nature than they deserve to experience it but if it is not plausible I dont think that it is necessary for them to experience.<br>4. There are obviously limits to the obligations and right because not everyone is going to get the chance to see Niagara falls or see the grand canyon it is just not possible. </div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 05:06:53 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774650250</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Part 6</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774680054</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. Technologies made without knowledge of the consequences seem to be the most dangerous. The example of DDT was a good example in which it was thought to be doing good for people but it was actually very harmful.<br>2. I would say more often that these technologies affect nature rather than humans. Humans do not realize how big of an effect it has on nature and therefore continue to use these technologies.<br>3.  There are many different precautionary principles but a couple different versions include the rio PP and the wingspread PP. The rio states the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Essentially meaning that depending on resources, different states can only do so much to protect the environment. The wingspread says that if there is any sign of threat or harm from a technology, precautionary action should be taken immediately.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 05:24:02 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/774680054</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Part 7</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/776535517</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. Cost-benefit analysis can let us assess issues that deal with a price to pay for a decision. This could mean technologies that have great impacts in society but at a cost to the environment. <br>2. issues of fairness include the desires of some people compared to the desires of others, some may want to protect the environment while some may not. Also a technology may have a greater impact on one demographic than another.<br>3. I basically answered the question already but anthropocentric peoples views clash with non-anthropocentric views in these type of situations. One side claims that the benefit to humanity is good at any cost to the environment while the other side argues the opposite.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 16:25:23 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/776535517</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Part 8</title>
         <author>srzadel</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/776566765</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>In all honesty, I had already thought about the rapidly increasing population when thinking about having children which is one of the reasons why I am unsure. If I am able to guarantee my child a somewhat comfortable life with my wealth than this issue would not matter very much.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2020-09-24 16:31:53 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/srzadel/4rc9hmwwqy0ug9kk/wish/776566765</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
