Is it Arrogant to Deny Climate Change or is it Arrogant to Say it is Arrogant? Understanding Arrogance and Cultivating Humility in Climate Change Discourse and Education

Abstract

This paper assesses the charge that climate change denial is arrogant and considers the educational priorities most appropriate to fostering greater humility about the climate change problem. I argue that even denial formed in ignorance of the organised misinformation campaign often constitutes a kind of arrogance, but that it is quite possible to humbly doubt the climate change problem. In some cases denial flows from other more or less serious errors or vices, such as ignorance, sincere but mistaken belief, dishonesty or selfishness. Those who press the arrogance charge also risk being arrogant in doing so. Educators can do a number of things to promote greater humility about climate change, including providing experiences that increase people's appreciation of their individual and general human limitations and improving their ability to distinguish credible from discreditable sources of scientific information and factual from normative dimensions of the climate change problem.

General Science Skepticism: Development and Validation of a New Scale

“…Many previous studies approached the topic by investigating thematic science denial. Science denial can be understood as a rejection of or an unreadiness to accept scientific evidence and consensus (Björnberg et al, 2017;Cook, 2017;Lewandowsky et al, 2013;Rutjens et al, 2021) that is either motivated or naïve (Ferkany, 2015). Previous studies mostly focused on denialism in particular subject areas like the refusal of the existence of the anthropogenic global warming (Druckman & McGrath, 2019), the denial of the effectiveness of vaccinations (Lewandowsky et al, 2013), the rejection of evolutionary theory (Rutjens et al, 2021), or the denial of the severity and dimensions of the COVID-19 pandemic (Latkin et al, 2021).…”

“…Hence, religious persons do not seem to be generally skeptical towards science but apparently reject certain scientific claims (e.g., evolution theory) based on a motivated nature (e.g., Rutjens et al, 2021). In general, science skepticism might belike science denialboth naïve and motivated, which means that it could stem from a lack of knowledge (possibly indicated by the negative relation between education and science skepticism) but also from the motivation to preserve existing beliefs and mindsets (e.g., thinking that the whole political system is flawed, and that science is a part of that) (see also Druckman & McGrath, 2019;Ferkany, 2015;Lewandowsky & Oberauer, 2016). Unfortunately, we were not able to test for a relation between general science skepticism and people's understanding of science (due to a problem with the scale's validity) which might have put this claim to the test.…”

Climate Change and the Free Marketplace of Ideas?

“…About three in ten registered voters (32 per cent) believe that global warming is either due to natural changes or not happening at all. There is a significant partisan split on this issue: eighty per cent of Democrats, 46 per cent of Independents and only thirty per cent of Republicans believe that climate change is primarily human caused (Leiserowitz et al 2019, 32-34; see also Dunlap, McCright and Yarosh 2016).…”

Climate of Arrogance, Disengagement and Injustice

“…In the first paper of this issue Matt Ferkany provides a careful analysis of the vice of arrogance in relation to various forms of climate change denial. He defends an 'interpersonal' conception of arrogance as consisting in a belief in one's own superiority and forms of reasoning and action dismissive of others' interests and opinions (Ferkany 2015). He presents an Aristotelian account with humility as the virtuous mean between arrogance on the side of excess and pathological insecurity and self-deprecation on the side of deficiency.…”