Energy: prometheus bound or unbound? A conceptual approach
Most contemporary debates surrounding technological development refer to the myth of Prometheus, which tells of how Prometheus stole fire from the gods to give it to humankind. This fire, or energy, is the means through which human beings are able to exercise greater power over their environment…and...
Đã lưu trong:
| Xuất bản năm: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/sapiens, |
|---|---|
| Tác giả chính: | |
| Định dạng: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Ngôn ngữ: | Anglais |
| Được phát hành: |
S.A.P.I.EN.S
2008
|
| Những chủ đề: | |
| Truy cập trực tuyến: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Tóm tắt: | Most contemporary debates surrounding technological development refer to the myth of Prometheus, which tells of how Prometheus stole fire from the gods to give it to humankind. This fire, or energy, is the means through which human beings are able to exercise greater power over their environment…and over one another. The myth, as told by Plato, describes how fire gave rise to hubris and caused great wars between human beings. Hence the two perspectives adopted in the contemporary debate on technology; some wish to see Prometheus act freely, thus allowing humanity to exercise the greatest powers possible over nature, and others would rather see Prometheus “chained once again,” judging that his power has become too great. However, less well known is the continuation of the myth: chaos impelled Zeus to send Hermes down to earth to bring dikè, justice, back to humanity, thus re-establishing peace. Indeed, the essential part of the myth is found in this often forgotten second part and not in whether or not Prometheus should be freed or chained. This article intends to draw from the lessons in this myth to analyze the geopolitics of contemporary energy. Following Ivan Illich’s analysis, it will be shown that moderation, or balance—as opposed to hubris, which describes excessiveness—is one of the necessary conditions underlying all global plans having peace as their objective. At stake in the energy debate is none other than the question of the distribution of power. This means not only debating questions of aggregate economic well-being but also legal questions (the right to development, the rights of future generations, etc.) |
|---|