Computer-Supported Analysis of Arguments in Climate Engineering

Abstract

Climate Engineering (CE) is the intentional large-scale intervention in the Earth’s climate system to counter climate change. CE is highly controversial, spurring global debates about whether and under which conditions it should be considered. We focus on the computer-supported analysis of a small subset of the arguments pro and contra CE interventions as presented in the work of Betz and Cacean (2012), namely those drawing on the “ethics of risk”; these arguments point out uncertainties in future deployment of CE technologies. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate and explain the application of higher-order interactive and automated theorem proving (utilizing shallow semantical embeddings) to the logical analysis of “real-life” argumentative discourse.