Upon learning the topic for this week’s discussion, I was excited to learn about geoengineering in hopes that it will bring up actual solutions to the issues we face. It is an interesting topic because it considers efforts to engineer something to intervene with the environment rather than cutting back on waste and choosing to reuse, etc…. A question came to mind while reading the article; we’ve been arguing over the same subjects for decades, so how will we come to a consensus soon enough to act and solve our problems at hand before they worsen? This article brought up many interesting ideas, such as how we want evidence-based policymaking, but that is hard to achieve when so much of our evidence is made by special interests, and then due to that commonly contradicts itself. 

The Gaian perspective was very interesting to me. It holds the belief that geoengineering will have a further negative impact on the Earth. Man has already hurt the world with intrusion, how will more intrusion solve the problems we started? They also believe that geoengineering is trying to play God – which in history has been shown to have very negative consequences. 

The Promethean perspective opposes the Gaian perspective and believes that technology can solve our problems. This perspective claims that “playing God” is the highest expression of human nature – isn’t that the problem that got us here in the first place?

After reviewing both perspectives, I personally side with the Gaian perspective. Although the idea of being able to solve our man-made problems with man-made technology sounds hopeful, I have deep reservations about that. I believe that the risks of harm are too high and that there are better ways to help save our world. I’d have to learn more about the details of geoengineering before coming to a stern position.