Showing posts with label Book #000. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Book #000. Show all posts

Monday, August 10, 2009

Book #010 - Field Notes from a Catastrophe : Man, Nature, and Climate change

Editor's Reviews from Amazon.com
From Publishers Weekly
On the burgeoning shelf of cautionary but occasionally alarmist books warning about the consequences of dramatic climate change, Kolbert's calmly persuasive reporting stands out for its sobering clarity. Expanding on a three-part series for the New Yorker, Kolbert (The Prophet of Love) lets facts rather than polemics tell the story: in essence, it's that Earth is now nearly as warm as it has been at any time in the last 420,000 years and is on the precipice of an unprecedented "climate regime, one with which modern humans have had no prior experience." An inexorable increase in the world's average temperature means that butterflies, which typically restrict themselves to well-defined climate zones, are now flitting where they've never been found before; that nearly every major glacier in the world is melting rapidly; and that the prescient Dutch are already preparing to let rising oceans reclaim some of their land. In her most pointed chapter, Kolbert chides the U.S. for refusing to sign on to the Kyoto Accord. In her most upbeat chapter, Kolbert singles out Burlington, Vt., for its impressive energy-saving campaign, which ought to be a model for the rest of the nation—just as this unbiased overview is a model for writing about an urgent environmental crisis. (Mar. 14)
From Scientific American
In the 1990s the inhabitants of Shishmaref, an Inupiat village on the Alaskan island of Sarichef, noticed that sea ice was forming later and melting earlier. The change meant that they could not safely hunt seal as they had traditionally and that a protective skirt of ice no longer buffered the small town from destructive storm waves. Shishmaref was being undone by a warming world. To survive, the villagers recently decided to move to the mainland. Soon Shishmaref on Sarichef will be gone. Pithy and powerful, the opening of Elizabeth Kolbert's book about global warming, Field Notes from a Catastrophe, echoes that of another book that also originated as a series of articles in the New Yorker magazine. Rachel Carson's Silent Spring starts in much the same way, with a fable about a town that lived in harmony with its surroundings and that fell silent. The question is, Can Field Notes galvanize a national movement to curb global warming in the same way Silent Spring sparked one to curb the use of pesticides? Silent Spring's success as a transformative force came about because of Carson's scientific authority, the way she shaped her argument, the immediate nature of the threat, and the many movements afoot in American society in 1962. Carson was a scientist, and she had credibility when she described how synthetic chemicals, DDT in particular, affect living things. That authority convinced her readers and withstood critics and attacks by the chemical industry. Carson's writing was direct and her rhetoric carefully chosen, as her biographer Linda Lear and other scholars have noted. Carson appreciated Americans' fears about nuclear fallout: something invisible was contaminating their food. She made clear DDT's similar qualities: "No witchcraft, no enemy action had silenced the rebirth of new life in this stricken world. The people had done it themselves." Concerned that her audience might be solely women--mothers worried about the health of their children--she also spoke directly to hunters, outdoorsmen. She deliberately sought, and got, the widest possible reach. Although Carson was describing something people could not see in their food, she was writing about something they could viscerally understand: they saw pesticides being sprayed. They could connect their health with their surroundings, and that kind of connection can lead to powerful activism. It did after Silent Spring. It did in the late 1970s in Woburn, Mass., as Jonathan Harr describes in A Civil Action, the story of families whose children were dying of leukemia. It did in 1978 at Love Canal in New York State. It continues to do so in communities around the world. If we can see the problem--in our family, in our neighborhood, in the natural world we are intimate with--it is not necessarily easier to tackle, but it becomes more immediate, more mobilizing. Just as important as Carson's credentials, her literary brilliance and the tangibility of her topic was the time at which she was writing. In the 1960s Americans were energetically exercising their freedom of transformation. As Adam Rome, an environmental historian at Pennsylvania State University, has written, the environmental movement that blossomed after Silent Spring owed a great deal to the Democratic agenda set in the mid-1950s, to the growing activism of middle-class women, and to a counterculture raised in fear of the bomb and the planet's end. The power of Silent Spring lay in what people and politicians did with it. Field Notes from a Catastrophe is not arriving on a similar scene. There is not much widespread U.S. protest about anything--not about the war with Iraq, not about the administration's links to oil and other industry, not about the diminishing of our civil rights. It is strangely quiet here. Americans are also burned out on environmental catastrophism. Many people have noted that with each new catastrophe that has not appeared--the extinction of nearly everything by the end of last year and food shortages, to mention two examples--doomsayers have lost more of their clout and their audience. The problems grow, but apathy has set in. Kolbert is also writing about something most of us cannot see clearly. Despite reports of melting glaciers, changing ecology, shorter winters and other critical indicators, global warming remains hard to grasp. We can see breast cancer cases on Long Island. We can see high asthma rates in inner cities. And we can see nongovernmental organizations struggling on those fronts. We are not good at seeing big, wide and far away; our sense of scale has not evolved in tandem with the scale of our lives. And yet. After Katrina, newspapers around the country explored the question of whether there was a link between the ferocity of the hurricane and global warming. (Answer: No one hurricane's force can be attributed to global warming, but trends of increasing intensity might, in time.) Maybe climate change is becoming more personal to more Americans--those in the lower 48. Kolbert's book contributes more important images for us to personalize. Fairbanks, Alaska, is losing its foundation; as the permafrost melts, huge holes are opening in the earth, under houses, in front yards. Twenty-two English butterfly species have shifted their ranges to the cooler north. The Dutch are busy developing amphibious houses. Burlington, Vt., has tried to reduce energy consumption and has been only modestly successful; without national political will, any one plan hits a wall. Field Notes has scientific authority as well. Kolbert is not a scientist, but she reports regularly on science, and she may well have talked to every researcher on the planet studying global warming. There are names and characters in Field Notes that even a climate-change obsessive may not have seen in other press articles or books. It can get dizzying at times. Yet the enduring impression is of deep, sober, rooted authority--the same impression Silent Spring conveys. The book is a review of the scientific evidence and of the failure of the politicians we chose. The details are terrifying, and Kolbert's point of view is very clear, but there is no rhetoric of rant here. She is most directly editorial in the last sentence of the book, and by that point, she has built the case. Other books on global warming have not had much widespread social or political effect. There have been many--and even Field Notes arrives at the same time as The Winds of Change, by Eugene Linden (Simon & Schuster), and The Weather Makers, by Tim Flannery (Atlantic Monthly Press). In 1989 the much celebrated The End of Nature, by Bill McKibben, for example, catalyzed debate--is nature really ending?--but not a national movement. Perhaps Field Notes can't make a movement where there's little concentrated activist juice. But something about this book feels as though it might. For a friend of mine, Kolbert's New Yorker series was an awakening--the first time, she said, she really understood what was happening and why we must act. Let's hope this powerful, clear and important book is not just lightly compared to Silent Spring. Let's hope it is this era's galvanizing text.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Monday, May 11, 2009

프랑스 고졸 자격 시험문제

프랑스 고졸 자격 시험문제
1장 인간(Human)

질문1-스스로 의식하지 못하는 행복이 가능한가?
질문2-꿈은 필요한가?
질문3-과거에서 벗어날 수 있다면 우리는 자유로운 존재가 될 수 있을까?
질문4-지금의 나는 내 과거의 총합인가?
질문5-관용의 정신에도 비관용이 내포되어 있는가?
질문6-사랑이 의무일 수 있는가?
질문7-행복은 단지 한순간 스치고 지나가는 것인가?
질문8-타인을 존경한다는 것은 일체의 열정을 배제한다는 것을 뜻하는가?
질문9-죽음은 인간에게서 일체의 존재 의미를 박탈해 가는가?
질문10-우리는 자기 자신에게 거짓말을 할 수 있나?
질문11-행복은 인간에게 도달 불가능한 것인가?

2장 인문학(Humanities)

질문1-우리가 하고 있는 말에는 우리 자신이 의식하고있는 것만이 담기는가?
질문2-철학이 세상을 바꿀 수 있는가?
질문3-철학자는 과학자에게 어떤 도움을 줄 수 있는가?
질문4-역사가는 객관적일 수 있는가?
질문5-역사학자가 기억력만 의존해도 좋은가?
질문6-역사는 인간에게 오는 것인가 아니면 인간에 의해 오는 것인가?
질문7-감각을 믿을 수 있는가?
질문8-재화만이 교환의 대상이 될 수 있는가?
질문9-인문학은 인간을 예견 가능한 존재로 파악하는가?
질문10-인류가 한 가지 언어만을 말하는 것은 바람직한가?

3장 예술(Arts)

질문1-예술 작품은 반드시 아름다운가?
질문2-예술없이 아름다움에 대하여 말할 수 있는가?
질문3-예술 작품의 복재는 그 작품에 해를 끼치는 일인가?
질문4-예술 작품은 모두 인간에 대해 이야기 하고 있는가?
질문5-예술이 인간과 현실과의 관계를 변화시킬 수 있는가?

4장 과학(Sciences)

질문1-생물학적 지식은 일체의 유기체를 기계로만 여기기를 요구하는가?
질문2-우리는 과학적으로 증명된 것만을 진리로 받아들여야 하는가?
질문3-계산, 그것은 사유한다는 것을 말하는 것인가?
질문4-무의식에 대한 과학은 가능한가?
질문5-오류는 진리를 발견하는 과정에서 어떤 역할을 하는가?
질문6-이론의 가치는 실제적 효용가치에 따라 가늠되는가?
질문7-과학의 용도는 어디에 있는가?
질문8-현실이 수학적 법칙에 따른다고 할 수 있는가?
질문9-기술이 인간조건을 바꿀 수 있는가?
질문10-지식은 종교적인 것이든 비종교적인 것이든 일체의 믿음을 배제하는가?
질문11-자연을 모델로 삼는 것이 어느 분야에서 가장 적합한가?

5장 정치와 권리(Politics&Rights)

질문1-권리를 수호한다는 것과 이익을 옹호한다는 것은 같은 뜻인가?
질문2-자유는 주어지는 것인가 아니면 싸워서 획득해야 하는 것인가?
질문3-법에 복종하지 않는 행동도 이성적인 행동일 수 있을까?
질문4-여론이 정권을 이끌 수 있는가?
질문5-의무를 다하지 않고도 권리를 행사할 수 있는가?
질문6-노동은 욕구 충족의 수단에 불구한가?
질문7- 정의의 요구와 자유의 요구는 구별될 수 있는가?
질문8-노동은 도덕적 가치를 지니는가?
질문9-자유를 두려워해야 하나?
질문10-유토피아는 한낱 꿈일 뿐인가?
질문11-국가는 개인의 적인가?
질문12-어디에서 정신의 자유를 알아차릴 수 있나?
질문13-권력 남용은 불가피한 것인가?
질문14-다름은 곧 불평등을 의미하는 것인가?
질문15-노동은 종속적일 따름인가?
질문16-평화와 불의가 함께 갈 수 있나?

6장 윤리(Ethics)

질문1-도덕적으로 행동한다는 것은 반드시 자신의 욕망과 싸운다는 것을 뜻하는가 ?
질문2-우리는 좋다고 하는 것만을 바라는가?
질문3-의무를 다하는 것만으로 충분한가?
질문4-무엇을 비인간적인 행위라고 하는가?
질문5-일시적이고 순간적인 것에도 가치가 존재하는가?
질문6-무엇이 내 안에서 어떤 행동을 해야 할 지를 말해 주는가?
질문7-우리는 정념을 찬양할 수 있는가?
질문8-종교적 믿음을 가지는 것은 이성을 포기한다는 것을 뜻하는가?
질문9-정열은 우리의 의무 이행을 방해하는가?
질문10-진실에 저항할 수 있는가?
질문11-진리가 우리 마음을 불편하게 할 때 진리 대신 우리에게 위안을 주는 환상을 좇아도 좋은가?