Assignment 12 Posted On Sunday, November 5, 2017, At 8:56 PM

Assignment 12posted On Sunday November 5 2017 85614 Pm Estgood E

Write a 3-4 page paper addressing the following: Restate your topic from Assignment 1, give your position on the topic, and explain why you chose that topic. Identify two opposing views on the topic, then present the view that you will defend in the assignment. Support your opinion with academic sources. Identify three reasons to support your position, and in separate paragraphs, describe why each reason supports your stance. Reflect on your Believing Game answers from Assignment 1: why did you believe those things? Was it due to expectation or did you examine their validity? Identify at least two biases you experienced during your examination; explain whether they supported or conflicted with your position and if they created barriers to your thinking. Consider how your background influenced your feelings about the topic. Has your thinking changed after using the Believing Game? If so, explain why; if not, justify why it remains the same.

Paper For Above instruction

In this paper, I will revisit my initial stance on the controversial topic of climate change policy, which I originally selected based on its relevance and urgency. My position is that immediate and substantive policy action is necessary to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change. I chose this topic because of its global significance, potential to impact future generations, and the conflicting views surrounding economic growth versus environmental sustainability.

Two prominent opposing views on this issue are the one advocating for rapid and comprehensive policy changes to address climate change, and the opposing viewpoint that emphasizes economic growth and skepticism about the feasibility or urgency of immediate actions. Proponents argue that swift policy measures are crucial to prevent catastrophic environmental shifts, while opponents contend that such policies could hinder economic development and disproportionately impact certain industries and communities.

The view I defend is that proactive climate policies are essential and justified given the scientific consensus on human-induced climate change. My support for this stance rests on three core reasons. First, scientific evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that human activities, particularly fossil fuel consumption, are primary drivers of recent climate change (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2021). Second, the long-term economic costs of inaction—such as disaster management, health crises, and loss of biodiversity—far exceed the short-term costs associated with implementing green policies (Stern, 2007). Third, transitioning to renewable energy sources can create new economic opportunities, jobs, and technological innovations, fostering sustainable growth (IRENA, 2019).

Reflecting on my Believing Game responses from Assignment 1, I initially believed the scientific consensus due to extensive exposure to empirical data and expert opinions. I examined the credibility of sources and trusted peer-reviewed research, which reinforced my convictions. However, my examination was also influenced by expectations that environmental sustainability is a moral imperative, which sometimes led to confirmation bias, favoring information that supported my view rather than critically evaluating opposing perspectives.

Two biases I identified during this process were availability bias—where recent and prominent information shaped my perception—and optimism bias, where I believed technological solutions could sufficiently address climate challenges. These biases initially supported my proactive stance but occasionally led to underestimating the economic and political complexities involved. Recognizing these biases was crucial because they affected my objectivity and created barriers to understanding the full scope of opposing viewpoints.

My background, including my education and cultural environment, significantly shaped my initial emotional connection to the issue. Growing up in a community aware of environmental issues and receiving education emphasizing sustainability reinforced my positive attitude toward policy intervention. Using the Believing Game, I found that my thinking has become more nuanced; I now appreciate the valid concerns about economic impacts and political resistance. This awareness has moderated my stance, making it more balanced and open to compromise, although I still advocate for urgent climate action due to its pressing necessity.

References

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2021). Sixth Assessment Report. IPCC. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/
• Stern, N. (2007). The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge University Press.
• International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). (2019). Renewable Energy and Jobs – Annual Review 2019. IRENA. https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/Jun/Renewable-Energy-and-Jobs
• McKinsey & Company. (2020). Climate risk and response: Physical hazards and socioeconomic impacts. McKinsey Global Institute.
• Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of Doubt. Bloomsbury Publishing.
• Schmidt, G. A., et al. (2014). Climate models: An overview. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(2), 175–197.
• Hulme, M. (2010). Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Change. Cambridge University Press.
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Advancing the Science of Climate Change. The National Academies Press.
• Weyant, J. P., et al. (2014). The Economics of Climate Change: A Review. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 39, 403–437.
• Keohane, R. O., & Olmstead, S. M. (2016). Markets and the Environment. Island Press.