9/1/16

The Reintroduction of the Grey Wolf to Yellowstone National Park

Some of the general issues that this case study brings up are whether
humans have a moral obligation to animals or to the environment and how
that obligation may vary depending on what species you are dealing with.
Within our group we agreed that humans do have an obligation to locally
endangered species, but only when it was humans that caused their
endangerment, or when their absence proved to be detrimental to the
environment. After further discussion we also found that some of us felt
more of an obligation to certain animals based on our own emotional
connection to them. Others of us did not feel an obligation to certain
animals, but to the ecosystem as a whole. For example, if centipedes played
a crucial role in the ecological system of Yellowstone National Park, then
centipede reintroduction would be just as important as the reintroductions of
the Grey Wolves. However, others felt less driven to spend thousands of
dollars on centipede reintroduction compared to the Grey Wolf
reintroduction. Those of us that found the presence of centipedes significant
hold more of a non-anthropocentric viewpoint because their main concern
was for the environment. Those of us that only found the Grey Wolf
significant enough to reintroduce hold a more anthropocentric viewpoint,
because they were more concerned about the cost of reintroduction and
about whether or not they liked the species. Overall the entire group agreed
that the reintroduction of the Grey Wolves is necessary to preserve the state

of the national park, and that the arguments the cattle ranchers made were
not significant enough to cancel this project.

9/8/16
Descartes, Locke, and Kant
1. Do either of the following: (A.) Identify something from the text that
you don't understand and try to explain it: (B.) Identify something from
the text that you disagree with and explain why you disagree with it;
(C.) Identify something important from the text that you agree with,
and explain why it is important.
a. Descartes says that the actions of animals are the product of
their organs/parts. He describes animals as if they were
machines: non-emotional, non-thinking beings with no soul. I,
personally, do not agree with his statement that only humans
have souls. I do agree that animals may not be as intellectually
advanced as humans, but I do believe they have thoughts and
emotions.
2. Explain how the distinction between the soul and the body functions in
Descartes' argument justifying the superiority of humans over nonhuman animals.
a. Descartes makes the argument that only humans have souls,
and because we do not know of any way to destroy ones soul,
this essentially makes the human soul immortal. Animals,
without souls, will die along with their physical body.
3. If we assume a secular standpoint, and thus reject Descartes' religious
basis for human superiority, do you think his conclusion of human
superiority has any justification? Explain.
a. I do think Descartes is correct in that humans are superior to
animals. Our ability to reason allows us to look at things from a
different perspective of just instinct. Our capacity to reject our
instinctual nature has allowed humans to develop much farther
than animals.

4. Explain Locke's reasoning for why there must be a way to acquire

private property. Why does he identify labor as the key to
understanding the nature of private property?
a. Locke says that nature is a resource that everyone needs/wants,
and it we did not create laws on how to acquire land, everyone
would have access and have the power to damage the land.
Labor is the only thing that is actually ours to offer in exchange
for nature and its resources.
5. Explain the rationale for the limitation on private property based on the
rule not to waste.
a. Locke believes that there should be limits on private property
because man should not labor for more than he could make us
of. Wasting resources is equivalent to stealing because those that
need those wasted resources can no longer use them.
6. Explain the connection among the second limitation Locke put on
private property, the as much and as good provision, the invention of
money, and the expansion of Europeans to America.
a. Locke says that people should only take land that they are able
to make us of, but the invention of money drove people to
cultivate more than they had use for, working only for the profit
and not the food.
7. Explain how Kant distinguishes an end-in-itself and a mere thing.
a. Kant stresses the idea that humans are not a means to
something else. You cannot use a human, but you can use a
mere thing because that can be used as a tool. Humans are
characterized as a means to an end because of their capacity to
reason, whereas animals do not possess that characteristic, so it
is justifiable to use them as a means to an end.
8. Even though animals are, for Kant, mere things, why is it wrong to
harm animals in many instances? Alternatively, when is it allowable to
harm animals?
a. Kant does not believe animals deserve to be treated with
kindness because they do not have the ability to judge. So it you
harm your old dog, it is not technically wrong, but it could
predispose you to treat humans cruelly.
9. Do you agree with Kant's view that animals are mere things? Explain.

a. I do not agree with Kant when he says animals are mere

things. They may not have the ability to reason, but I believe
animals have the ability to carry emotions and they absolutely
have sensation. We should not treat animals as tools just as we
should not treat animals as tools.

9/15/16
Case Study #2
Whose Summer Home is it?
Yes Build the House

Provide jobs for people working on the house

Good for the couple living there, nice view
Anthropocentric point of view: using the land to your own benefit
Mr. and Mrs. Jones deserve what they worked for fulfilling the
American Dream

Dont Build the House

Destruction of endangered sand dunes

Harmful to native plants to increase deer population
Introducing red pines that wont serve any ecological purpose
Island is only 3 miles long
Non-Anthropocentric point of view: prevent further harm to this
ecosystem
Undisturbed by humans
o Ecological Integrity
Bringing only male deer Not a sound argument, female deer on
island already
Building a summer home is a pure luxury

9/22/16
Minteer Reading

1. Explain the difference between the two ways of understanding values that
Minteer discusses, foundationalism and pragmatism. What is the rationale for
each type of value?
Foundationalism:
Devotion to fixed premises
Moral justification about our responsibilities to animals, species,
and ecological systems
Self-evident claims
Non-anthropocentric
Bio-centric holists
Risk losing ourselves in relativism when we focus on morality
Environmental values come from intuition
Natural world projects systemic values onto our culture
General
Consistent
Law-like
Pragmatism
Different contexts put pressure on our moral thinking
Think critically about the situation and are willing to shift morals
respectively
2. Describe Rolston's, Callicott's, and Katz's respective foundational views.
Rolston:
Believes the natural world has chosen what is morally correct for
us. Something from a world beyond the human mind, beyond
human experience, is received into your mind. He believes
these morals are certain and do not need any evaluation.
Callicott:
Consistency is a necessity, and without it we would become
frustrated and argumentative. We should not act upon
contradictory ethical principles.
Katz
Environmental protection is morally correct and will always be
morally correct regardless of the circumstance or individual
preference. Compares violating the environment to adultery or
lying, saying that both are always wrong.

3. Explain Minteer's argument that philosophers like Rolston, Callicott, and

Katz tend to undermine their own foundationalist philosophical projects (p.
342). What are the two major factors in the argument that Minteer uses to
show this?
These foundationalist philosophers are so closed off in their principals
that they rule out all other possibilities, making them look unconfident
in their claims. Also, when discussing issues they dont account for any
variability, yet, in real world situations there is always variability.
4. Explain Minteer's claims that foundationalism, one, fails to accommodate
biosocial variability and, two, is ideological and elitist.
There are different cultures and different environments, and that will
naturally give rise to different values. Even if foundationalism were
correct, it would still be necessary to engage in peoples experiences in
order to change their views. Foundationalism is rather impractical if no
one believes in it.
5. How does Minteer use Dewey to describe the foundationalist project
(344)? How is this description supposed to serve as a critique of
foundationalism? What, lastly, is Minteer's alternative?
Foundationalism cuts off all critical thinking and further exploration.
Morality is meant to be discussed and we will never reach a final
conclusion on what is always/never morally correct. The fact that
Foundationalists believe they have a set of laws they can consistently
abide by is illogical.

Class Discussion
Foundationalism
Knowledge
i. Moral knowledge
1. Environmental values
Origins

i. Human reason
ii. Philosophy
iii. Discovered
iv. One source
Objective values independent of human experience
Self-evident
Guarantees a respect for nature

Pragmatism
Knowledge
i. Moral knowledge
1. Environmental values
Origins
i. Human experience
ii. Not discovered, but constructed
iii. Pluralistic, many sources
There are pro- and anti-environmental values
i. In order to convince others you must anchor your
argument in a human experience

9/27/16
A Sand County Almanac
1. Identify a passage from the book that you regard as significant. Explain
why it is significant. Identify any connections to other class texts or issues.

On page 6 when Leopold talks about how many of us genuinely do

believe food comes from the grocery store, and heat comes from the
furnace. There is a general disconnect from nature that technology has
created, and this is what makes it so easy for us to exploit and overrun
nature for our own desires.

2. What does Leopold mean by a law of diminishing returns in progress

(vii)? Identify some examples to illustrate his meaning. Do you agree with
this law?

When Leopold uses the phrase a law of diminishing returns in

progress he is referring to our increasing use of nature as our society
moves forward in technology. As humans progress, we are finding it
easier to reap the benefits of nature, therefore diminishing the supply.
In our society, wealth is signified by how little involvement we have in
the allocation of resources such as food, and heat. As we progress, the
number of intermediates between nature and our necessities
increases, making it easier to take more without recognizing the value
in things.
3. What does Leopold mean by land yields a cultural harvest (ix)? How
does this idea relate to the above quote and to Wapner's view about the
value of sacrifice?

By cultural harvest I think Leopold means we can make a living off

the land. Humans are dependent on nature even though many of us
may not realize that. Leopold suggests that we might need to hold the
reigns on our progress as a society so that we may rediscover the
value of nature. This relates to Wapners view of sacrifice because in
sacrificing our progress, in return we will gain a more enriched life from
strengthening our relationship with nature.
4. Explain the significance of Leopold's descriptions of the meadow mouse,
the rough-legged hawk, and the rabbit (pp. 4-5) to:
a. His analysis of the monument to the passenger pigeon (108112),
The animals that Leopold describes on pages 4 and 5 are
self-concerned. The mouse is only worried about
scavenging for food and avoiding the talons of the hawk,
whereas the hawk is only concerned about hunting the
mice for food. In the monument to the passenger pigeon,
we see that humans are mournful of the loss of pigeons,

something that we do not see in any other species. Our

ability to be concerned for other species than just our own
shows our superiority over all other animals.
b. His analysis of the two college boys on a canoe trip on the
Flambeau (112-116)
The canoe trip for the boys was their first and last moment
of freedom before they went into the army, similar to the
thawing of the snow and the mouse. The moment the snow
had melted, the mouse was able to find more food, but it
then had to worry about being a predator to the hawk. The
types of freedom between the boys and the animals
described are different. For animals, their freedom would
be freedom from want/food, but for the boys, their freedom
is the freedom to make mistakes without consequence. All
living things desire their own safety under the freedom to
make mistakes. As humans we have achieved this for
example, because if we burn our dinner, we do not risk
starvation, we can simply make something else. However,
if a hawk fails to catch a mouse, it simply will not eat that
day.
c. His notion of spiritual dangers (6)
The spiritual danger of becoming so advanced in our
technology is that we will lose an understanding of how
difficult it is to work for our resources and necessities. The
descriptions of each animal show the reality of life without
technology, and that there are always dangers to be aware
of.

9/29/16
A Sand County Almanac

1. Identify a passage from the book that you regard as significant. Explain
why it is significant. Identify any connections to other class texts or issues.
No one in the bus sees these relics. A worried farmer, his fertilizer bill
projecting from his shirt pocketWere I to ask him why his corn makes
a hundred bushels, while that of non-prairie states does well to make
thirty, he would probably answer that Illinois soil is better. Were I to ask
him the name of that white spike of pea-like flowers hugging the fence,
he would shake his head. A weed, likely (Illinois Bus Ride). I found this
passage to be significant because it really alludes to how economically
driven our world is, and how ecology is rarely taken into account. The
economic success of this farmer was greatly due to this weed. This
ties into our discussion last week about how our progress as a society
only adds to our detachment from the reality that humans are
dependent on nature. The more we progress as a species, the less we
give credit to or even recognize the role nature plays in our success.
2. Explain the significance of Leopold's narration of history through the
sawing of the tree in February.
In Leopolds narration of history though the sawing of the tree he is
making a point about how difficult it is for a tree to be successful and
survive through all the drastic change and natural disasters that occur
over the years. He mentions how one acorn was able to be fertilized
and then grew into a tree that made it through the great depression
and the dust bowl. One must appreciate the resilience of trees because
as Leopold says in the beginning of the chapter thus lived to garner
eighty years of June sun. It is this sunlight that is now being released,
through the intervention of my axe and saw, to warm my shack and my
spirit through eighty gusts of blizzard. If people had a better
understanding of the process a tree goes through, we might be more
reluctant to abuse our forests. Leopold also talks about how the tree
documents human history, and by this he means that nature
essentially absorbs the effects of human action and that humans very
much have an impact on nature.
3. In the readings from March, Marshland Elegy, May, Prairie Birthday, and
Illinois Bus ride, unpack the common theme of what Leopold is doing, using
the concepts perception, education, knowledge, and economics.

A common theme that I found among these readings was how different
our perceptions are of nature, especially between an environmentalist
and a businessperson. Leopold mentions how there are certain plants
in cornfields that improve the success of corn greatly because of their
nitrogen-fixing abilities. But the individual that owns that cornfield may
see that plant as an unnecessary weed because his only focus is on the
corn. Leopold stresses the importance of being knowledgeable about
our environment because our lives are dependent up on it regardless
of how far we progress in technology. Just as a goose needs to be
aware of its surroundings to survive, we also need to be educated on
our environment to be able to use it respectfully and efficiently.
Class Discussion

We have transitioned from this perspective of having a mutually

tolerating relationship with nature, to this idea that we need to be
friends with nature. But friendship is a demanding relationship to have,
and it is too personal/dangerous to have that kind of relationship with
nature, nor is it feasible. We need to develop a sense of mutual
dependency with nature, to foster both respect and distance from each
other.

10/4/16
A Sand County Almanac
1. Identify a passage from the book that you regard as significant. Explain
why it is significant. Identify any connections to other class texts or issues.
I found pages 16 and 17 from the chapter February very interesting, in
Leopolds analysis of the different tools used to cut down trees. When
using a saw you must cut across the year markings of a tree, with a
wedge you must go perpendicular, creating segments of years, and
with an ax you cut diagonally across the year markings.

2. In Thinking Like a Mountain, Escudilla, Guacamaja, and Song of the

Gavilan, Leopold develops a particular way of understanding science. What is
this understanding and how is the science of ecology implicated in it? How
does Leopold contrast this understanding of science with the dominant
understanding?
In the first few readings we were assigned to read, Leopold expresses
how nature itself seems to have the best understanding of the beings
within its habitat. In Thinking like a Mountain, he mentions how only
the mountain knows the hidden meaning behind the wolves howl, but
humans have yet to understand that. There is a science to why nature
has these systems, and in order to understand this science you must
look at nature from the perspective of the mountain. The mountain
does not favor only a few organisms, it makes sure the community
does well as a whole. By eliminating the wolf or the bear from the land,
you eliminate a keystone species, which will be detrimental to the
entire system. In most sciences, you research by taking apart the
whole and analyzing the pieces, but with ecology, you must synthesize
and examine how the system works as a whole. Hard sciences
separate the quantitative data from aesthetics, while Leopold believes
science and beauty must come hand in hand or else you will never
fully understand. Instead of having this detachment from what you are
studying, Leopold were prefer to be completely immersed, mind and
soul.
3. In February, Axe-in-Hand, Red Legs Kicking, and On Top, Leopold analyzes
the role of tools/technology in the human relation to nature. What is this
analysis and what are the values implicated in both his positive and negative
assessment of technology?
Technology, the more mediums between you and your actions allow
you to more easily exploit nature
-We are responsible for the tools that we wield and how we choose to
use them
-Ax not pen A true conservationist used his technology as close to
nature as possible.
-It is all right to have a bias because at least then you are not
indifferent. Indifference is a luxury
-Find an aspect of nature that you are in love with to help you cultivate
love for the rest of the environment. With love comes the desire to
develop the correct skills to care for what you love.
-Specific Love Skills General Love Land Ethic

-Technology as a mediation can either promote or hinder (by

separating us from nature) our love. Eliminates the need for skill

10/6/16
A Sand County Almanac
1. Identify a passage from the book that you regard as significant. Explain
why it is significant. Identify any connections to other class texts or issues.
In the first couple pages of Wildlife in American Culture Leopold says:
Civilization has so cluttered this elemental man-earth relation with
gadgets and middlemen that awareness of it is growing dim. We fancy
that industry supports us, forgetting what supports industry. I found
this passage to be significant because it so accurately describes where
our society stands today. So often we forget that our survival is
grounded on what the environment can provide for us. As we become
more distanced from this fact, we are more likely to exploit nature for
our own uses.s
2. In Conservation Esthetic and Wildlife in American Culture, Leopold
develops views about recreation (Conservation Esthetic) and the cultural
values of renewing contact with wild things (Wildlife in American Culture).
Explain these views as they relate to technology, experience, and
perception. How does his analysis of the five components (168) of
recreation relate to your answer to the above question?
In Wildlife in American Culture, Leopold discusses the values that
result from traditional forms of natural recreation. It reminds of our
natural origins, how humans are in fact dependent on nature, and it
fosters sportsmanship, either with others or between you and the
environment. As we progress in technology, we diminish our need for
skills to be successful in recreational activities and it distances us from
these values that come about from being immersed in nature. The
intentions of recreation are trophy hunting, isolation, fresh-air,
perception, and husbandry. Trophy hunting is clearly an issue when it is
done in mass amounts and without other purpose. But Leopold greatly

supports strengthening our perception of nature to understand our

dependence of it, and fostering husbandry to care for other organisms.
It is specifically these two components of recreation that would require
the most skill and therefore be more involved.
3. Explain the meaning of and connection between the first few paragraphs
from Wildlife in American Culture (p. 177, first two paragraphs) and
Wilderness (p. 188, first five paragraphs). What kind of picture of culture
does Leopold envision in these passages?
These two sections discuss how our cultures are rooted in nature, and
the reasons for our differences in cultures are the different
environments we were based in. But we are moving toward
increasingly similar societies because technology and industrialization
have allowed for decreased dependency on our own land. Leopold sees
this as a loss of culture, because our relation to nature has great value.

Regan and Sagoff, The Case for Animal Rights

1. What, for Regan, is the fundamental basis upon which he objects to the
use of animals as means to human ends? How does this basis differ
from Singer's philosophical approach to animal ethics?
a. Regan believes we cannot use another being as simply a
resource. The act of using an animal as a means to an end is
immoral because they are unable to give consent for their use.
Singers view opposed Regans view in that he thought it was
natural for humans to use animals as a resource. As a utilitarian,
the consent of the individual does not matter; the only thing that
matters is benefiting the majority.
2. Explain Regan's critique of the cruelty-kindness view.
a. The cruelty-kindness view states that we should not be cruel to
non-human animals, that we should simply be kind to them. The
problem Regan had with this view was that it is very possible for
a person to perform a kind act with poor intentions. And the
same goes for a person committing a cruel act with good
intentions. It does not matter that a farmer gives his animals
maximum grazing time and large, clean cages; these kinds acts

do not change the fact that he is using these animals for his own
use; that is whats immoral.
3. Explain Regan's cup analogy, which he uses to critique the utilitarian
defense of animals. How does Regan's notion of subject of a life
differ philosophically from Singer's use of the notion of subjective
experience?
a. Regans cup analogy essentially means that, for the utilitarian, it
is not the cup that matters; it is only the amount of liquid inside
that matters. The liquid inside represents feelings of satisfaction
or frustration, and the utilitarians goal is to maximize
satisfaction and minimize the frustration for the majority of those
cups. If this goal requires that one cup is completely destroyed,
the utilitarian would be all right with that. Regan, on the other
hand, would argue against this. He thinks that what matters is
that they are all cups.
4. Explain Regan's argument in response (p. 23) to the claim that
nonhuman animals have inherent value, just less inherent value than
humans. Do you find his argument to be strong or weak? Explain.
a. Regan says there is little justification for the view that nonhuman
animals have less inherent value than humans. He makes the
comparison to a human with mental or physical disabilities; this
does not make them any less of a human, and therefore we
shouldnt use that argument to justify our poor treatment of
animals.
5. Do you agree with Sagoff's argument that being in a moral community
with non-human nature requires the expansion of the same moral
rights to animals as we ascribe to humans? Explain.
a. In order to live in a true moral community with non-human
nature we would need to extend the same moral rights to
animals as we ascribe to humans, but animals would not be able
to reciprocate these moral actions. Without this reciprocity from
the animals it would not be a true community.
6. Explain how Sagoff uses the idea of basic rights to argue that
humans have an unlimited obligation to protect all animals, domestic
and wild, from harm. Do you agree that this is the inevitable
implication of the animal liberation/rights position? Explain.
a. Sagoff believes humans have the obligation to satisfy the needs
of animals, not just protect them from harm. I dont necessarily
believe humans should be required to care for all animals as if
they were humans. The fact that humans have the capacity for
reason places us in an entirely different world than animals.
There are many cases where we might think we are helping
animals when in reality we are just interfering.
10/25/16

Case Study #3
The Hunting of Endangered Animals

After watching this video, I can see how the government was okay with
this kind of system. In such an economically driven society, providing a
monetary incentive for these hunters is one way to make sure they continue
breeding these animals. But I do not think this is the best way to keep these
species alive. Government subsidies could provide enough money for
ranchers to breed these animals. The video mentioned that hunters are only
allowed to hunt 10% of a species each year, but 10% of an endangered
species is a significant portion.

11/1/16
Lee and Westra
1. Explain the difference between Callicott's and Rolston's views on the intrinsic value of
nature.
a. Callicott argues that nonhuman beings possess value in themselves but not for
themselves; that nonhuman things are merely a locus of values, but not a source
of values. It is a humans ability for sympathy that gives us this value. Rolston
disagrees, believing that nonhuman nature is both a locus and a source of values.
Nature will have value whether humans are around to experience it or not.
2. How does Lee use her distinction between recognized articulated value and mutely
enacted value to resolve the conflict between Callicott and Rolston? On her view, explain
why the source of intrinsic value must be understood in a Cartesian/Kantian sense
instead of a Humean sense.
a. Recognized articulated value exists only in a world with humans, and is based on
our ability for consciousness and reason. Mutely enacted value is more so

associated with nonhuman nature. It exists objectively and independent of human

consciousness.
3. Explain Lee's argument for the intrinsic value of nature, based on the notion of an infinite
regress.
a. The notion of infinite regress comes from the idea that humans value deer as food,
and that deer values grass as food, and the grass values sunlight and water and so
on. However, it isnt the instrumental value each of these beings posses that is
significant. It is the ability of these beings to instrumentally value something else
that gives it intrinsic value. By actively seeking nourishment they become
valuable.
4. Explain the two kinds of integrity Westra identifies and how she applies them to
ecosystems.
a. Westra describes one kind of integrity as the restoration and maintenance of
ecosystems. The other kind of integrity she talks about is a philosophical one.
This kind of integrity would generate a harmony among all activities and
processes taking place in an ecosystem.
5. How does Westra understand the role of facts in ethics? What facts does
she identify about nature to argue against the role of sympathy and sentience as a basis of
environmental ethics? What does Westra mean when she says that animal rights support a
paternalistic disrespect for the realities that govern all life (220). Do you agree that a
concern based on sympathy, sentience, or rights must fail to respect the relevant facts of
nature and wild animals themselves?
a. Westra describes facts as limits of norms and believes they create a basis for
normative judgments. One fact that she identifies is that animal/environmental
intercourse is not based on sympathy, but on hostility. One being survives at the
expense of another. Westras description of paternalistic disrespect was that
humans often push our own values onto animals. However, we cannot change the
natural course of survival in nature. I agree that basing our actions on sympathy
and sentience would not produce the best outcome in a system that is based on
hostility.
6. Explain the basis of Westra's notion of respect applied to nature and wild animals if it is
not based on sympathy, sentience, or rights. How does she use the example of war to
illustrate her point? Do you agree that her argument show that it is possible to admit to
no sympathy for an individual, even one of the same species (another human being), and
still retain respect. (223)
a. Westra uses the example of a soldier in war to show that we may not carry
sympathy for the solider on opposite war lines, but we can still respect them as
another human being. I absolutely agree that one can respect another being

without having any sympathy for it. Respect can come from fear or indifference,
which are two things that animals may experience in the wild.
7. Explain how Westra extends her ethics of respect, formulated for wild animals, to
domestic animals.
a. Westra believes the fact that domestic animals are voluntarily brought into our
lives, just like children, we have an even greater duty to show them respect than
wild animals. She believes the responsibility accompanied with owning an animal
entails a certain amount of respect.

Animal Ethics
Environmental Ethics
Biocentrism
o Lee
o Westra
Ecocentrism
o Callicott
o Rolston
1. Property based Ethics
a. Moral value, moral standing obligation
2. Relational
a. Certain ways of relating determine moral obligations
Sympathy (Hume)
Commonality
Can identify with nature
Comes from Darwins theory of Evolution. We are all part of the same
system.
Rolston
Ecosystems
o Goal-oriented
Westra
Value is rooted in integrity
o People
Physical
Personal
o Nature
Controlled/Limited Hostility

11/8/16
The Saga of the Great Apes
1. Regardless if the chimpanzees dont mind being dressed up and
putting on shows, does not deter from the fact that we are using these
animals for our own entertainment purposes. Dressing them up is also
demeaning and disregards the fact that they may have their own
culture.

2. Because chimpanzees are so genetically similar to humans, that makes

them the perfect candidate to perform tests on. If we are able to test
on chimpanzees in a way that inflicts the least amount of
pain/discomfort, I do think the scientific benefits would out way the
ethical issues. Especially in the case of HIV/AIDs, chimpanzees have
developed a resistance to this disease that is so harmful to humans,
and the opportunity to eradicate this disease takes priority.
3. I believe this issue depends on why the procedure did not work the first
time. If it was just a technical issue, then I think it would be justifiable
to continue research on baboon hearts. But if baboon hearts are simply
not compatible with human hearts, we should stop killing baboons for
the small chance that it might work one day. Baboons may not be as
genetically similar to us as chimpanzees, but they still deserve a
certain level of respect as an animal.
4. I dont think we owe apes anything in terms on enhancing their way of
life. If their current lifestyle is not totally to their liking, that doesnt
mean they are in any major harm. No animals are living in a system
that is completely to their liking, including humans.
5. I dont think humans should intervene if there is a chimpanzee
genocide unless humans somehow had a role in the start of this
genocide. If not, there may be a purpose behind this genocide that we
dont entirely understand.

11/10/16
Naess and Guha
1. What is the significance of the first two principles of the deep ecology
movement (pp. 19-20) in relation to Naess' distinction between the
narrow and comprehensive self?

Rejecting the view of man and the environment

Narrow self
o Man in environment
o Anthropocentrism

Comprehensive self
o Total field

o Biospherical egalitarianism
2. Explain how Naess accommodates the existence of conflicts of interest
with his view of wide identification? Give an example that illustrates
how conflicts of interest in Western society do not exist through wide
identification.

Wide identification is the act of becoming more aware of the living

beings and systems outside of ourselves. An example of this would be
paying your respects after hunting and killing an animal. In doing this
you are acknowledging where this animal came from, and not just
viewing it as a source of food or recreation. This is not a custom in
Western society.

3. Explain Naess' critique of the Western view of self-realization and the

implications for the egoism-altruism distinction.

Naess does not believe there is a distinction between egoism and

altruism in Western societies. He claims that all altruistic acts
performed in fact have an indirect benefit on us. If this is true, none of
our acts are truly selfless. This seems especially prevalent in Western
society because we view all altruistic acts as burdens.

4. What do you think Naess means when he says Only special social
conditions are able to make people inhibit their normal spontaneous reaction
toward suffering (32)?

Naess believes all humans have a natural aversion to suffering. That is

why if we try to alleviate suffering because of a spontaneous urge to
do so, the act is beautiful but not moral. Going against these
spontaneous natural reactions to suffering would be moral.

5. Explain why Guha rejects the deep ecological view that proper response to
environmental problems requires the transition from anthropocentrism to
biocentrism?

Guha follows the social ecological view that the harm we inflict on the
environment is the result of our social structure. He thinks the two
main causes of ecological destruction are over consumption and
growing militarization. The average American consumes far more than
the average Asian, and we are also less aware of this, which creates
habits of wastefulness. The issue is not biological, but is a social
phenomenon that can be changed if we change the way our system
works. Guha also argues that we should not be moving from
anthropocentrism to biocentrism, because we do not live in a truly

anthropocentric society. The fact that we have this social hierarchy

shows that we are choosing to harm some humans over others, and
that does not follow the philosophy of anthropocentrism.
6. What is Guha's worry about American environmental groups applying their
methods in places like India? How does he use this as a critique of deep
ecology?

Guha worries that the creation of preservation sites such as Protect

Tiger will interfere with that communitys balanced relationship with
nature. This project would require many communities to relocate;
causing them to move farther from the environment they depend on,
potentially hindering the sustainability of the ecosystem. Deep
ecologys biocentric view does not acknowledge that humans may
have a positive impact on the environment when living with it, not
separate from it.

7. Explain Guha's claim that American deep ecology is not as radical as it

presents itself. What, in contrast, does Guha's radical alternative look like?

Preservation is not a radical solution to environmental degradation

because it only strengthens the notion that humans are separate from
nature. Guha suggests that humans adopt the philosophy of living
from nature and with it. That is a far more radical approach because it
would create a very drastic change in our way of life.

Class Discussion
Deep Ecology
Self-realization
o Spiritual process
o Relation between self and nature
o Biological
o Population dynamics
Example of deep ecologists view: Famine is just a natural phenomenon
that occurs within all species that can regulate population. We should
not intervene and just let it run its course.
Social Ecology
Social structural
o Capitalism

Constant growth
Reconfiguration of social structure
o Socialism
o Anarchist
o Social
Consumption patters
Example of Social ecologists view: Famine is the result of social and
economic structure of food distribution, and we should intervene.

11/15/16
Mies and Whyte

1. Why does Mies call catching-up development a myth and what is the
true reality of development?

Mies calls the catching-up development a myth because instead of

allowing impoverished countries rise up, it only strengthens the divide
between them and wealthier countries. Universal development is
impossible because lack of development is premised on development
itself. Mies things development itself is not a good thing because it is
not a viable long-term option. Our resources are limited, and it has
been shown that developed countries have greater cases of pollution,
suicide, racism and sexism.

2. Why, according to Mies, is development a losing proposition for all

people?

It is precisely the labor done by the poor that allows countries like the
U.S to thrive. If we were all developed, all of our economic systems

would worsen because no one would be willing to bear the costs of

development.
3. Explain how the example of breast milk poisoning illustrates Mies'
argument that development is a myth.

Mies uses the breast milk example as an illustration of how self-interest

is the driving force of our plans to develop struggling countries. The
woman in Germany said she wanted South Indians to produce ragi as
source of protein for babies. She said the production and selling of ragi
would help the economy of South India, but in reality, this would only
make ragi more expensive to the poor communities of that country,
when in the past it was a free source of nutrition. The German woman
did not take that into account because she was only concerned about
her only self-interest.

4. Explain how Whyte distinguishes between traditional environmental

justice and environmental justice with respect to indigenous people

Traditional environmental justice focuses on the distribution of

resources and how environmental harms can affect society. Indigenous
environmental justice has a much stronger cultural context and
focuses on how a society can be robbed of its capacity to experience
the world in a certain way.

5. What is the difference between the socioecological contexts of Western

societies and indigenous societies, like the Anangu?

In Western societies, we dont carry that sense of responsibility to the

environment, while in many indigenous communities the people
depend directly on the environment, and this dependency is why the
Anangu attribute so much meaning to nature and natural formations
like the Uluru rock. They believe the Uluru rock to signify their loyalty
to their ancestors. In Western society, we feel almost no accountability
to our ancestors or nature, as they are things outside of ourselves.

6. What kind of solutions would be appropriate for the conflict between

tourist visiting of Uluru and Tjukurpa law against climbing, especially
considering the problems of enforcement.

The park should remove any easy access to the Uluru rock to deter
tourists from visiting it. The Anangu people should also educate
tourists on the significance of this rock. They were unwilling to create
boundaries around the rock because they thought people should only
stay away from it out of genuine respect. If the community was

educated on the meaning behind the rock, tourists would be more

likely to understand from the Anangu peoples point of view.
7. Explain the complex web of responsibility that exists within some
indigenous cultures and the related idea that environmental problems
are not just environmental problems but threats to cultural survival and
thus collective continuance.

To many indigenous people, the environment is very much intertwined

with their culture, and therefore they have a duty to protect their
culture by protecting their environment. Whyte gives the example
Mohawk fishing, and how pollution of waterways interferes with their
connection to fish and the lakes, disrupting the mutual responsibilities
that exist between them all.

8. Explain how Whyte uses the idea of collective continuance to explain

the environmental injustice settler colonial societies inflict on
indigenous people.

If one society interferes with another societys capacity to adapt to

external forces, the former society can impose preventable harm on
the latter societys members. Whyte describes harm as putting stress
on another societys ability to have operating systems of
responsibilities.

9. Given that virtually everything about American society can

be described as a form of environmental injustice toward Native
Americans, and thus as a form of genocide, what is our responsibility?

After all the harm Americans have caused to the natural habitats and
indigenous people of this country, we have a responsibility to restore
this environment that we all depend on, and to be proactive about the
current crisis that is climate change. We also owe the Native Americans
the simple gift of respect of their culture and traditions. But, as seen
with the Dakota Pipeline controversy, we are clearly not acting with the
respect or compassion that this community deserves.

Class Discussion
Two competing explanations of world order:
1. Global class hierarchy

a. Serves over consumption

b. Maintained by violence
2. Catching up development
What is the path of development?
1. Technological advancements
a. Assistance from developed world
b. Increased GDP
c. Development loans
i. Requirements for repayment
1. Austerity: elimination of social programs
2. Free trade
Environmental Justice
1980s academic + activist
Inequitable distributions of environmental harms and benefits
o Class, race, sex
Sightings of polluting facilities
o Waste treatments
o Agricultural CAFO
Not really an environmental issue, more focused on the needs of
humans.
Environmentalism vs. Environmental Justice
Traditional Environmental Justice
Distribution of resources and negative effects
Indigenous Environmental Justice
11/22/16
Case Study #4
Environmental Justice
1. Inequitable distribution of environmental benefits and burdens
a. Class and race
2. The decision-making process
a. Free informed consent

Environmental decision-making, which results in inequitable treatment of

individuals on the basis of race and socio-economic status is prima facie
wrong. (63) Distributive equity does not say that all such discrimination is
wrong, but the burden of proof is on discriminators to justify the
discrimination and thus all cases are prima facie wrong. Explain the logic of
this claim.
1. You must provide relevant differences in order to discriminate. The
starting point is that discrimination is wrong, but it can be justified
in certain cases. For example, in the U.S we follow prima facie in
chemical use, following the rule that all substances are safe until
proven otherwise. But we should follow the opposite of that; all
substances are harmful until proven safe.
Can you think of a situation in which environmental decision-making that
results in inequitable treatment of individuals turns out to be right?
2. If the government decides to put a dam in a river to create a lake,
this may create negative effects for the ecosystem and those that
live there, but the lake may bring more tourism, which would bring
in more revenue for the town.
Do you believe race to be an independent factor in inequitable decisionmaking or is environmental justice on racial ground (environmental racism)
reducible to socio-economic factors? (62)
3. I believe the role race plays in environmental justice is an
independent factor. Racial discrimination does not have to be
explicit, it can be through companies choosing neighborhoods with
a high percentage of minorities because property will be cheaper
there.
How is it that polluters are able to violate these basic ethical principles?
What about our current social-political-economic world makes it possible?
4. Our current socio-political-economic world makes it possible for
companies to get away with polluting because polluting helps them
to reduce company expenses, and with a profit-driven economy, we
have no problem with choosing the option that creates the most
revenue.