Pages

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Saving the Earth or saving people?

Here's the Oren Lyons quote that I did not do justice in class today, and a few others that I think were particularly relevant to our discussion:



“What if we choose to eradicate ourselves from this Earth, by whatever means? The Earth goes nowhere. And in time, it will regenerate, and all the lakes will be pristine. The rivers, the waters, the mountains, everything will be green again. It'll be peaceful. There may not be people, but the Earth will regenerate. And you know why? Because the Earth has all the time in the world and we don't.” - Oren Lyons

“When we all talk about "saving the environment" in a way it's misstated because the environment is going to survive. We are the ones who may not survive. Or we may survive in a world we don't particularly want to live in.” - Kenny Ausubel

“We found ourselves on a planet that is coldly finding its own way toward an equilibrium without any necessary condition that human survival be a part of it.” - Paul Schneider (The Adirondacks, 133)

5 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think this ties into a lot of what we are talking about in class. Global warming is so scary for humanity because it is not detrimental to the Earth but rather our species. These drastic changes may just be a good part of succession that wipes away the world as we know it (because we are no longer a part of it). But it is hard for us to see this as a good thing because from our perspective, does a tree make a sound when it falls if no one is around? If we are not here to see the Earth regenerate to pristine condition, do we care?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great quotes - for me it all circles back to the idea of ownership. We worry about all these issues, be it something as far-reaching as global warming or as seemingly trivial as stepping on an alpine plant, not because of its effect on the environment but because they somehow affect us. We then feel a selfish (as opposed to altruistic) responsibility to manage our environment, even though it'll carry on without us. Not to beat a dead horse, but it then reminds me of the paradox of how we must "own" the land in order to preserve it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree with this. I think we often confuse altruism with selfish behavior. It can be a confusing line, and maybe this is a bit of a stretch, but ultimately I think people generally do things "for others" or "for the earth" because they are somehow gratified for it, whether that gratification be concrete or more of a sentiment.

      Delete
  4. When it comes down to it, humans are just like every other species because we're obsessed with our own survival. And it makes sense -- we're genetically programmed to succeed by what ever means possible. I think that humanity is the most dangerous invasive species on the planet, and find it sadly amusing when we discuss all the other invasives in the world without referring to ourselves (in the same way that we refer to other creatures as "animals" but separate that concept entirely from that of "human beings").

    But as we've discussed, invasive species are ultimately replaced with other overstory species in the cycle of succession. It is a scary thought, but eventually humanity won't be here. We will be replaced. The world has no concept of "stewardship," no concept or "perfection" or "eco friendly." In the grand scheme of things, these words are merely reflective of the human inclination to conserve a world that continues to act as a suitable habitat for us.

    ReplyDelete