The Rhetoric of Climate Change
My report on climate change takes a look at the rhetoric used when climate change is commonly discussed. For the purposes of my paper, “climate change” refers specifically to anthropogenic global warming, or climate change that is caused by humans. While it is commonly understood by most that humans are indeed responsible for certain changes in the earth’s climate, there are some who argue the opposite—that humans cannot have had such an impact on climate, and further that attempts at mitigating climate change are bound to be fruitless at best and destructive on both the economic and libertarian level at worst. It is this dichotomy that brings about strong rhetoric, which purpose is to win over those who are otherwise undecided on the issue.
While the topic rhetoric as it pertains to climate change discussion is a broad one, I focus on two primary tactics: alarmism and phraseology. I examine the trend for both sides to paint the failure to act as all but guaranteeing doom on some level. With phraseology I briefly look at how each side carefully uses language to both promote their own ideas and deride “the other side.”
The key takeaway of my paper is that an issue as complex as climate change should still be simple enough to determine both its reality or non-reality and what or what not to do about it. The issue is, in my opinion, made exceedingly difficult by both sides engaging in politics on an issue that the science alone should be left to settle.
While the topic rhetoric as it pertains to climate change discussion is a broad one, I focus on two primary tactics: alarmism and phraseology. I examine the trend for both sides to paint the failure to act as all but guaranteeing doom on some level. With phraseology I briefly look at how each side carefully uses language to both promote their own ideas and deride “the other side.”
The key takeaway of my paper is that an issue as complex as climate change should still be simple enough to determine both its reality or non-reality and what or what not to do about it. The issue is, in my opinion, made exceedingly difficult by both sides engaging in politics on an issue that the science alone should be left to settle.