User:Katieghhad/sandbox

=Truth Work (Environmental Science Bit)= https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:LGreg/sandbox/Approaches_to_Knowledge_(LG_seminar)/_Group_2/Truth/Philosophy_%26_Environmental_Science

Environmental Science

What are its truths (if it has any)?

Truth in environmental science is under a lot of controversy. Environmental science aims to study human relationships with the natural environment, and as a result, also aims to tackle the current environmental crisis. However, the shared truth as regarded by environmental scientists is that climate change is unpredictable but it is happening and is heavily influenced by humans. That said, another truth shared by environmental scientists are that humans do have an impact on the climate, and over the last few hundred years, have been overall having a negative impact Other than that general idea, the findings about specific problems can vary largely or minimally but all focus on the truth that humans are negatively influencing the environment and that there must be action taken for humans to either or both adapt and mitigate.

However, these empirical truths shared by scientists and a large majority of the world aren't necessarily considered truth by others.

How does it come to realise/evaluate truth?

Truth in environmental science involves studying the impact changes have on different ecosystems. Although there are multiple types of environmental science, most of them follow the same idea of studying relationships and correlations between physical characteristics of the environment / physical changes in the environment (either human or naturally caused) and it's impact on different species or organisms. This is usually done by looking at trends of different environmental changes, such as atmospheric greenhouse gases.

Is truth important to the discipline?

Truth is important to this discipline in terms of actually creating productive change and acting upon the data. As a result, it can eb said that the truth from this discipline is needed to become universally truth.

The shared truths by scientists in this field focuses on the human impact in the environment. However, due to people - especially those in power- preferring their "personal truths" of climate change not being real, being natural, or not being our responsibility, the findings and potential solutions created by this scientists are rendered useless. For example, with all the climate change denial by people in power (such as Donald Trump ), there is still a lack of action to combat and the negative impacts and mitigate the causes of climate change, as seen by the Trump administration suing California as they attempt to tackle climate change.

Therefore, it can be said that shared truths in this field is imperative in order to make the discipline's findings useful in the real world.

=Group Brainstorming for Wikibooks= EVIDENCE: Surrogacy → who’s the mother? Biological perspectives (intention versus the actual DNA) legal perspectives (legal documents) psychological (if something is inherited or taught through social environment → parental investment theory)

Legalisation of euthanasia in the UK → ethical perspectives (is it ethical?, who’s allowed to get euthanized?), philosophy/religious perspectives (suicide → is looked down upon?) → religious texts biological perspectives (suffering, signing your life away and who has the right to say you can be euthanized- ethics of medicine, etc) , legal perspectives (complications of consent → pain combined with anaesthesia and pain killers),

Legalisation of recreational use of marijuana in the UK→ sociological perspective (crime rate etc) → correlation graphs, looking at relations Interviews (for stereotypes and to look at the relationships within the community) Content analysis → how it’s played in the media → positive view vs negative view medical perspective (medicinal applications of marijuana, lack of evidence for long term effects) → empirical evidence/positivist evidence religious/historica perspectives (role marijuana has played in religions) → content analysis/biblical texts; historical perspective (e.g. historical reasons for alcohol being legal and weed not) → anecdotal evidence political perspective (what’s better for a city → drug crime, what’s considered “safe”) → other countries’ laws → business perspective, hemp as wood alternative, CBD