I strongly side with the act of changing our habitats for the sake of helping the environment. I insist on helping our environment not because you achieve “a sense of personal virtue” (89). Too many times does one aim to create a monumental change without thinking, realistically, that our intentions are no better than those of someone who has no intent to change. Pollan begins to analyze when being environmentally aware of your actions became virtuous, noting writers from the Wall Street Journal to the New Yorker. He questions how doing the right thing in accordance to the environment’s well-being has now been labeled as a “mark of liberal soft-headedness”(89)
The process by which one becomes an environmentalist, that is, someone who cares for nature itself, begins by seeing “the pretty” within the natural world and “it expands through successive stages of the beautiful to values as yet uncaptured by language” (Leopold, 96). John Muir recognized the importance of beauty and wrote of its presence in all places, not just the pristine, as “beauty…is made manifest in the little window-sill gardens of the poor, though perhaps only a geranium slip in a broken cup, as well as in the carefully tended rose and lily gardens of the rich” (Muir, 97). Thus, humans must connect primordially to nature so that it reveals itself and inspires “wonder and awe” within the viewer (Cooper, 343). These emotions are translated into care for the land so one who comes to love the land, they are an environmentalist. Thus, everyone can develop a land ethic, not just the elite, and the classist nature of the environmental movement is
He argues that we should treat our land with care and respect as we now treat one another, for we will be ushering a new era of change the is all for the better. The second half of the essay begins with "The Ecological Conscience". Starting off by stating “Conservation is a state of harmony between men and land” and going on to describe how our fight for land is improving it is moving far too slow. This transforms into the
Thomas Hill has an interesting perspective when it comes to human being’s relationship with the environment. Hill proposes that human beings should start looking at the problem of environmental destruction from a different view point. Instead of asking questions that pertain to the relativity of the environment to human beings, plants, God, and their intrinsic value, it must be asked what type of person, and their character traits, lead them to want to destroy the environment. More specifically, Thomas Hill raises the question of “What sort of person would destroy the natural environment--or even see its value solely in cost/benefit/terms?" (Hill 2008, pg 211).
Unlike humans trying to reconnect back to nature, we rather seem to want to create an artificial nature in our cage of industrious lives. Regrettably, this author 's call to save the environment has not been fully applied, as of today humans are still releasing toxins into the environment at the highest rate in history, occupying forests with building in the name of owning something, in places such as Antarctica, the polar bears are starving, even worst humans had it illegal to feed them while they are exploding and destroying their homes, the seas-fishes are iced up, just to name a few reasons why connecting back to nature is critical. Although green activists such as Ecosia have been working on restoring the environment, however, more needs to be done. We must see to it that nature bounces back to its full
With these advantages, we are on the path to permit the elimination of the last virgin forests, wild species, clean air, and clean water. Our freedom has led to the limitation of being free from the noise of human establishments. Society needs to come to this realization that it is destroying the pureness of the wilderness and the impact that it has on the human psychology and spirituality. Recycling, becoming minimalistic, and ensuring the conservation of the remaining wildlife is vital to the survival of individualism, creativity, and
Once the environment is perceived as an equal part of an individual’s community, the human ethical spirit will respect the environment, cherish its benefits and beauty, and be obligated to preserve it. If future generations are taught to create harmony between the three pillars of society: economic, social, and environmental, further damage to the environment can be
The more realistic lense is what Purdy calls “the ecological view” (8) in which everything is interrelated and works together, whether it be in nature or a part of industrialized society. This is the vision that the Anthropocene is leaning towards because no one in my generation or generations younger than me is being taught to see nature as a right. Returning to Louv’s argument on whether taking a walk in nature is a right or a
The harsh reality surrounds the fact that as time and technology advances, the separation between people and nature increases as well. Louv, in his rhetoric from Last Child in the Woods (2008), argues why the separation between society and nature is distressing.
In Jeremy Rifkin’s article, “A Change of Heart about Animals”, proves his statement that many of our fellow creatures also “feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love..”. I agree that animals share similar feelings as us, and I believe that they should be treated in a way that they can feel comfortable and care in their surroundings. Just because animals may not be completely the same as us, that should not give the right to a human to mistreat and abuse of an animal’s life. Animals can be well treated and cared for without giving them the right to be treated as a human.
In the article All Animals Are Equal, written by Peter Singer addresses the inadequacies surrounding the rights of animals in the societies of today. Singer opens the article by presenting a scholarly parallels between the fight for gender equality, banishment of racism and the establishment of rights for “nonhumans.” In order to explain this constant set of inequalities that seem to riddle our society, Singer readily uses the term “speciesism”, which he acquired from a fellow animals rights advocator, Richard Ryder. Essentially, this term is defined by Singer as a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species. Singer claims that if this idea of speciesism
Therefore, we need to think about tomorrow with respect to every action that we take in the environment and in this case we can say that sustainable development requires slower population growth. With this in mind, we need to be educated through our cultures about the impact we caused to the environment as we continue to reproduce. The challenge of environmental ethics has led to the attempt to apply traditional ethical theories, including consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, to support contemporary environmental concerns; the preservation of biodiversity as an ethical goal; the broader concerns of some thinkers with wilderness, the built environment and the politics of poverty; the ethics of sustainability and climate change, and some directions for possible future developments of the discipline [ CITATION And15 \l 1033 ]. With this multi-dimensional approach one can see that it is more of a cultural issue to think of it from its origin.
1. Introduction When mentioning the term ecology, enormous rainforests, wild rivers, wide fields, and all the greenery and natural surroundings are the first things that come to one’s mind. However, according to the definition of Oxford dictionary, ecology is “the branch of biology that deals with the relations of organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings”. This definition is of a huge importance for those who want to emerge into the studies of ecocriticism, and for those who want to deal with an ecocritical reading of a literary work. The notion that organisms, their relations to one another and to their physical surroundings is crucial when it comes to ecology explains the fact why, when starting with the analysis in this way, one must include not just natural ecology, but also social and spiritual.
Many people who go into nature always see it as something beautiful and aesthetic, but they never see the other side to nature. Humankind’s connection with nature isn’t a real one. They always look at the bright side of nature but are blind to the true dark side of nature. JB MacKinnon’s article “False Idyll” (2012), reveals that nature is not just flowers in a field but can also be the survival of the fittest. He backs up his claim by talking about nature through anecdotes and expert’s research.
We should value nature and its animals much more (Becker, 1971). In today’s world we have what Becker calls a “power-saw mentality” (Becker, 1971, p. 114). Instead we’re greedy with what nature has to offer us. “Man takes what nature offers us, but usually only what he needs” (Becker, 1971, p. 114). There is a psychological difference in today’s world of what we enjoy out of nature (Becker, 1971).