The
human race’s interaction with the environment may vary from person
to person, but in general human’s tend to harvest and take from the
environment at their own will for their own personal benefit. People
take from the environment without giving back to the environment or
taking precautions to preserve it, at least most of the population
seems to work this way. Long story short; economy and personal
benefit comes first in most peoples decisions, and while this may
seem like the best decision short term, it may not be the best in the
long run, and may not even be the best decision for other people. In
some cases not only is the surrounding environment negatively
impacted, but also other people may be affected as well. Each person
has a different meaning for environmental ethics, and then a
different set of ethics at that. I have my own meaning for ethics:
principals or guidelines that guide a person to do what is right
throughout life, or what is morally right. Since I have first
enrolled in Ohio University in August of 2011, my environmental
ethics have evolved and changed greatly over time. When it comes to
environmental ethics, I believe that people should do what is right
for the environment and for the people around them. People need to
think about the risk, and what or who their decision is going to
impact before they make it. In today’s world people take resources
for granted, and will place their greed and personal economic benefit
before the welfare of the environment and other people, and learning
this has changed my view and actions towards the environment.
Before
I attended Ohio University for my college education, I was hardly at
all aware of environmental problems. Part of this was because where I
attended school, the staff did not teach about environmental problems
and how they impact our current lives and our future. My only
exposure to anything related to environmental issues was when I heard
rumors about global warming, and I just believed it to be an over
exaggeration, or just a prediction. When I attended Ohio University,
I began to take some environmental geography classes and that is
where I started to learn not only was global warming a serious issue,
but that there were many other issues as well. As a result of this,
my environmental ethics began to change drastically very early on in
college, and I myself became much more environmentally aware in my
daily life.
On
top of global warming being caused by burning fossil fuels and
putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, I became aware of
overpopulation, oil shortages, water shortages, and resource
depletion as a whole due to the high population. The Earth’s human
population is already estimated to be too high, and it continues to
grow faster than ever before, which causes poverty levels to rise.
The growing population also requires a higher demand of resources
that are already being over harvested. As a result the amount of
fresh water for drinking is being depleted and forces hundreds of
millions of people to live with lack of access to clean water. The
demand for fossil fuels also increases, which not only depletes the
supply of oil and coal, but also increases the amount of carbon
dioxide being put into the atmosphere. Another important resource
that is being depleted faster than they are being renewed is trees.
An increased population requires more shelter and other supplies or
necessities that require wood, and as a result deforestation
increases. Deforestation eliminates a part of the environment that
absorbs carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, and causes the carbon
dioxide absorbed to be released back into the atmosphere, and only
increases the effects of global warming. As the environmental
scientist put it in the show “Years of Living Dangerously,”
“deforestation is a double wammy (for the effects of global
warming).” Due to overpopulation, I truly believe that the human
population actually needs large food corporations and agribusinesses.
I feel that the food corporations and agribusinesses are needed to
feed the population, despite how poorly they treat the animals. I
believe it is ethically wrong for many food corporations to abuse and
treat the animals the way they do, but they are however probably
needed for the human population. On the other hand, I do find it hard
to believe that food corporations cannot spend some extra money to
ensure those animals are feed properly and have an adequate amount of
space. Long story short, my environmental ethics in a few years went
from being just about nothing to believing that the human population
is facing many issues and needs to start working on fixing those
issues, reducing the use of natural resources, and start thinking
about how an action affects the environment and other people.
I
believe that I was already very environmentally aware and had strong
environmental ethics before this semester, and those ethics evolved
even more and I became more environmentally aware on a smaller scale
after a couple readings and documentaries. Michael Pollan’s essay
“Why Bother?” got me thinking about that question and how
important that question actually is for how people currently view and
interact with the environment. This essay helped me look at how an
individual can possibly make a difference as opposed to just looking
at the big picture and seeing that the whole world needs to change.
Start at the individual level and then hopefully it will spread to
enough people that it will make a big difference. The reading
“Dispatch from Toxic Town” and the documentary “On Coal River”
made me more aware of how companies not only impact the environment,
but also how they may affect other people as well. They showed me,
that many companies will place their desire for a monetary profit
before the wellbeing of other people. “Natural School Reform” by
Richard Louv also presents proof that interaction with the
environment during schooling not only can increase an individual’s
view of the environment, but can also boost test scores and overall
intelligence. All of these evolved my prior environmental ethics
slightly, and helped me to look at the small details of a big picture
and to see how those small details are contributing to the problems
in the big picture.
In
Michael Pollan’s essay “Why Bother?” he discusses that this
question goes through many people’s minds when it comes to going
green and trying to make a difference. People believe that if they
make a sacrifice to make a difference, that it will not make any
difference, because there are billions of other people in the world
that are just counteracting the small difference, and therefore it is
useless… why bother? Pollan discusses that sure many other people
are still carrying out their normal routine which may negate any
positive impacts done by an individual, but that one individual
making an unnoticeable difference can influence others around them
through their actions, which will eventually lead to more people
contributing. Then that slowly evolves from one individual to a group
of people making a small difference, and many of those small groups
together can make a big difference. I totally agree with Pollan that
one individual can influence others to try and make a difference and
eventually that individual made a big difference through influence. I
also believe that even if it is one person trying to make a
difference, sure the impact may be unnoticeable, but it is still
better than nothing at all. I feel that the “why bother?”
question is a very important question that helps us understand human
interaction with the environment. Also it is most likely the question
that is preventing people from trying to make a difference. Imagine
if the question did not exist and everyone attempted to make a
difference (minimized fossil fuel use, conserved water as best as
they can, etc). Many of our current environmental problems would most
likely be less potent, or may not exist at all.
“Dispatch
from Toxic Town” by Tara Hulen is a classic example of a large
company placing their profits above the environment and other
people’s lives. In this reading, Monsanto moves into an area next
to a town called Anniston. Anniston is known as a model town and is a
home to many people. Monsanto begins to pollute the nearby stream
(actions like this is why so much freshwater is undrinkable) and
environment with PCBs. People in the so called model town begin to
get sick and have no idea what is causing it. Fish in the stream are
also getting sick and deformed due to the pollution. People start to
learn that the sicknesses are coming from the pollution in the
surrounding environment, which is coming from Monsanto. People are
then forced to leave Anniston, which at this point is known as a
toxic town, and are forced to live elsewhere while Monsanto stays.
This large corporation turned a model town into a toxic town, and not
only destroyed the surrounding environment, but also the lives of the
people. I believe this is definitely ethically wrong, that a company
can ruin people’s lives or cause deaths and not care, and get away
with it. The documentary “On Coal River” is another example this
problem. A coal mining company moves into an area near a town of
people, and blows the mountain top off of Coal River Mountain to
start mining coal. The company’s actions pollute the air and the
nearby river, and just like “Dispatch from Toxic Town” people
start to get ill. The people then start to protest and press charges
against the company for their actions, and the company continues to
do what they are doing. The company is there to make money, and since
it also improves the economy the company gets away with it. Although
the children at schools near the area are also being affected, the
company is still trying to make a quick buck and tells the people to
pick up and leave if they do not like what is being done. Again, I
think this is ethically wrong since not only does it have negative
effects on the environment, but it also puts human lives at stake.
Companies like these need to think about who and what their actions
are going to impact before they make a decision.
In
“Natural School Reform” Richard Louv compares the United States’
method of teaching and school curriculum to other nations around the
world, especially Finland. He shows proof that Finland is superior to
the United States in testing and overall intelligence. However,
surprisingly Finnish schools work very differently from schools here
in the United States, and actually allow there students to go outside
more and interact with the environment much more than the United
States. Here in the United States we put students into a classroom
(sometimes with no windows) and keep them there to study and hardly
ever let them go outside. Schools in the United States have very
short recesses and some schools do not even have recess at all.
Students in the United States get very little interaction with the
environment, while Finnish schools give their students a lot of time
outside and even teach lessons outside, giving the students a lot of
interaction with their environment. So, students in the United States
spend more time in the classroom and are scoring lower on tests
compared to Finnish students. Richard Louv is showing a positive
correlation between time interacting with the environment and overall
intelligence. I found this very surprising when I read this, because
I figured that here in the United States where we basically put kids
into a classroom and just pound them with information and stress the
importance of testing, that we would rank higher in intelligence. On
the other hand, maybe it is because we put a lot of stress on our
students and just push for learn, learn, learn, and nothing else,
whereas in Finland they allow their students to relax and have fun at
the same time as learning. I believe that the United States needs to
start adopting the Finnish approach to schooling, since statistics
show that it works, and because if students get more interaction with
the environment, they will probably appreciate it more. This may also
be the reason why many young kids do not like school, because it is
boring when you do nothing but sit in a classroom all day and try to
learn. I also believe that if our students get more interaction with
the environment and become more informed about how our actions may
impact it, then students will become more environmentally aware at a
young age, which may result in overall better care for the
environment when they live on their own.
My
environmental ethics have evolved and changed greatly over the last
three years. I already considered myself quite environmentally aware
before this year and believe I have still become more environmentally
conscious. My knowledge on how humans interact with the environment
on a micro level has definitely grown, and it has helped me to be
more environmentally friendly in my daily life with water,
electricity, food waste, and so on. Pollan’s Essay “Why Bother?”
really got me thinking about the question on an individual level and
showed me how I can make a difference, whether small or big.
“Dispatch from Toxic Town” and “On Coal River” have shown me
how a large company can impact the lives of many people and how some
people will place money before almost anything. Richard Louv’s
“Natural School Reform” really shocked me when Louv showed that
the United States who stresses hardly on academics actually ranked
lower in intelligence than Finland which allows their students to
have fun and interact with the environment while teaching. People in
the world today need to start trying to make a difference like Pollan
says in his essay, and people also need to start working on
conserving resources, as well as ensuring certain actions will not
harm the environment in extreme ways or other people. Basically,
people need to try their best to fix current environmental issues so
they do not get worse in the future, or so new problems do not
develop.
Works Cited
Adams,
J. Wood. “On
Coal River
Four Minute Trailer.” YouTube.
25 March 2009. Web. 13
April
2014.
Hulen,
Tara. “Dispatch from Toxic Town.” Listening
to Earth. Baruch
College, City University
Of
New York: Pearson Longman, 2005.73-77.
Louv,
Richard. “Natural School Reform.” Last
Child in the Woods : Saving our Children from Nature-Deficit
Disorder.
Chapel Hill, NC : Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill, 2005. 201- 222.
Pollan, Michael.
“Why Bother?” The
Allyn-Bacon Guide to Writing: Concise Edition.
6th
ed. Ed. John D. Ramage, John C. Bean, and June Johnson. Boston:
Longman, 2012. 87-93.
22,
2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment