MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941165888

Review of Byron Williston, The Anthropocene Project: Virtue in the Age of Climate Change . Oxford University Press, 2015. 209 pages

2019· article· en· W2941165888 on OpenAlex
Jay Foster

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Geoengineering
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropoceneVirtueEnvironmental ethicsClimate changeClimate justiceEconomic JusticeHistoryPolitical scienceSociologyLawPhilosophyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Byron Williston has titled his thoughtful and engaging book on virtue ethics and climate change The Anthropocene Project.Here Williston is grappling with an issue that vexes most of us.The science of anthropogenic climate change has been increasingly clear, at least since the IPCC First Assessment Report in 1990.But, in the intervening twenty-five or so years we've done damn little about it.We have responded to climate change with dithering and doubt, not concrete action.Why is this?Williston suggests that it is because we are bad people-well, perhaps not exactly bad but just not very good.Grappling with climate change, he argues, will require us to become better, more virtuous people.As he tells us: "If we are going to find a morally defensible path through the climate crisis we need to become better people, and that means cultivating the virtues" (7).To glean the wisdom needed to cope with climate change, the specific virtues of hope, truthfulness and justice will need cultivation.By its very title, The Anthropocene Project positions itself in juxtaposition with the so-called "Enlightenment Project."The phrase "the Enlightenment Project" seems to have entered the philosophical lexicon some thirty years after the Manhattan Project via Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue (1981).That book argued that whatever the successes of science and materialism, the moral project of Enlightenment was always doomed to failure.Enlightenment philosophes maintained that morality could be given an individual and rational basis, independent of history and tradition, by arguing from principles of human nature to conclusions about moral rules and precepts.MacIntyre infamously argued that this line of argument could only sustain moral imperatives and moral emotions, never claims to undebatable moral truths and falsehoods.A little like MacIntyre, Williston takes calculative approaches to moral problems to be a dead end, at least as far as environmental action is concerned.The rational calculation of individual interests enjoined by orthodox utilitarianism, contractarianism and game theory lead inexorably to collective action problems at the individual and international levels.Williston specifically claims that they all lead to a "tragedy of the commons" (13) pace

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it