Bill Mckibben

During our discussion today, I am so glad that Bill McKibben was mentioned. I am a huge fan of his and am a true believer in all that he has to say. I actually heard him speak in Washington, D.C. last February at the Forward on Climate rally and it was one of the most memorable experiences of my young life thus far. It was so inspiring to hear him speak, especially surrounded by over 40,000 like minded individuals; it is something I highly advocate for everyone to do. I think he is such a great model for the issue of climate change; he never set out to become a huge advocate for climate change, he just happened to become the voice of it because in all reality there was no one else.

More people need to see the dangers of climate change and though the percentage of people who believe in climate change has shifted to 70% (http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/Climate-Beliefs-September-2012) thats not enough.... Everyone needs to understand this serious problem so that we don't end up like the dinosaurs - quickly evolving to adapt to our surroundings or that we don't become the dinosaurs. We are such a smart species with highly varied accomplishments but its high time to look at all the environmental repercussions of our success and take responsibility. This is a global initiative that needs to happen, and in my opinion is not getting enough attention.

Essay 1

In this chapter what I found most interesting were the thought of ecofeminism and the "Gaia hypothesis". The thought that James Lovelock presents is that the Earth behaves as one single organism and the flora and fauna that inhibit the Earth act together in a way that regulates the climate and produces the best conditions for life. I think that this hypothesis is key in understanding why all living things are essential. This can be seen especially through keystone species- but it needs to be emphasized that each species on this planet has a specific job and niche as a result of evolution. But Lovelock is more focused on how the changes will force the Earth into a new equilibrium that may in fact not be able to provide a suitable habitat for humans. This theory is one that I most definitely want to focus on more in depth. The thought that all the flora and fauna on Earth create an equilibrium that is perfect for human habitat and we must focus on that equilibrium in order to save human life is a bit too anthropocentric for my personal taste though. I believe that we should be focusing on saving the symbiosis of the plants and animals on this planet for the sole reason that it is our responsibility as a dominant species, that has in fact been a key part in the destruction of the habitat of these plants and animals.

The other idea that struck me as particularly interesting in this chapter was ecofeminism. The thought that both women and nature are dominated that is "wrong and ought to be eliminated" is something that I had never thought of before. The thought put forth by ecofeminists that "all ethical views... are products of particular world views, contexts, and locations" is a particularly striking. I think that this way of thinking of ethical views is one that needs to be addressed. Are ethical views products of contexts and locations or are they something ingrained in human consciousness. It is also argued that ecofeminist ethics grow out of "defining relationships", especially relationships of humans caring for non-humans and environments. I really want to discuss this a bit more as it is a little confusing, but overall I found this way of thinking of environmental ethics different in the way that is takes a complete different argument than the other ways of thinking presented in this chapter. 

First Post

Hello all!

I once again just wanted to introduce myself. My name is Abbey. I am an environmental studies major with the hopes of  eventually becoming an environmental lawyer focusing on policy making. I have a strong background in the scientific workings of the environment as well as the laws in place in this country in relation to the environment; and through this class I hope to gain more knowledge about the point of views and writings devoted to the ethics of the environment - even though today in class we learned that environmental ethics is a bit of an oxymoron.


I found today's class particularly simulating in relation to biocentrism. I find that way of thought so interesting - how people like the Jains are so considerate of the environment around them in contrast to individuals who have no consideration of the environment that encompasses their whole lives. Much like we talked about on the scale of animal ethics and how we need to take care of our dogs because it was through human action that they became domesticized, I feel like the same is true in regards to the environment. The environment today is a direct result of human action; and it is only once that we accept this responsibility and try to change activities that cause harm will improvements be seen.

I am looking forward to many more stimulating discussions throughout this semester!