Jeff Latour Analysis

Throughout history, humans have had a strong reliance on nature and their environment. As far back as historians can look, people have depended on elements of nature for their survival. In the past few decades, the increased advancement of technology has led to an unfortunate division between humans and nature, and this lack of respect is becoming a flaw in current day society. In Last Child in the Woods, Louv criticizes modern culture by arguing that humans increasing reliance on technology has led to their decreasing connection with nature through the use of relevant anecdotes, rhetorical questions and powerful imagery to appeal to ethos.

The thesis of “Despair Not” is “… the time has come for outspoken, full-throated heroism in the face of the great moral danger of our own day: the environmental crisis – an unfolding calamity whose main victims are our own children and grandchildren.”

Human desire for affluence over the course of modern history has proven to be a driving force in the detriment of the natural world, demonstrating the apathetic outlook humans have towards our . Richard Louv’s Last Child argument describes the loosening of interest in our current generation; it has built a wall that one day may cut our ropes from earthly surroundings. Although this passage was written with incontrovertible accuracy about humans in the present, the author’s bias outlook, which reflects in the tone of his writing,makes this piece undeniably one sided, which not only takes credibility away from the author’s argument, but also creates this controversial idea of modern technology serving as an unhealthy focus in today’s society that only distracts humans away from the environment.

Since the dawn of mankind, clusters of innovations throughout history have allowed for societal progression at an explosive rate. While primarily fostering a centrifugal system of advancements; humans’ interests in expansion is spiraling out of control. Throughout history elements of collapse can be traced through civilizations and natural resources. Wright’s argument posits humans have hyperextended their utilization of resources at a rate that cannot be replenished, therein by setting up the world for the largest ecological collapse in history (Wright, 2004, pg. 130-131). Due to the cyclical process of past collapse and reformation humans have an advantage to rectify our current consumption rates ultimately avoiding a fate similar to past societies (Wright, 2004, pg. 131). As such Wright’s argument should frame larger discussions of responsible citizenship.

The relationship between people and their environment in A Land Remembered is one where the profit from land exploitation is naturally corrupting and exponentially increases the exploiters lust for larger profit, leading to the exploiter planning larger scale endeavors in the future. The author, Patrick D. Smith (1984), suggests the idea that communities naturally grow in a hedonic cycle to crave more resources to fuel loftier endeavors that require even more resources from the environment, an idea that is also discussed by Aldo Leopold in the Land Ethic as wholly negative, and that is also part of my world view that is rather more optimistic.

Everyone wants to know how they will be remembered after they pass on. Some are memorialized for their heroic or philanthropic deeds, while others infamously go down in history for their disrepute. However, the majority of humankind is quickly forgotten after death. In Death Comes for the Archbishop, Willa Cather narrates the story of two priests and their work with the people in the Western United States. In the last chapter, as Father Latour is dying, he wonders what he would be most remembered for. He had served the people of New Mexico, teaching them, helping them, and caring for them. Towards the end of his life, he even had a basilica built in Santa Fe. Like the magnificent cathedral he would leave behind, Father Latour leaves behind a legacy of stability, Faith, and community.

Question 1: What are the assumptions implicit in Bill French’s determination of his company’s break-even point?

Within this nine-chapter, two-part book, author Paul Farmer single handedly both analyzed, and harshly critiqued the central and deeply rooted ideas of poverty throughout the world. In his book, Pathologies of Power, he tackles the daunting and largely misunderstood topic of poverty “to reveal the ways in which the most basic right-the right to survive- is trampled in an age of great affluence... (pg.6). Farmer, is both a professor of medical anthropology at Harvard, a doctor, and a founding director of Partners in Health, which is a global health organization that is concentrated in the most poverty-stricken areas to bring proper health care to those in need. These positions have allowed him to travel to some of the most underdeveloped areas in the world, with the largest portion of his time spent in Haiti. The experiences and observations that Farmer made in these locations provided him with a foundation of first-hand knowledge to come to the conclusion that the inequality toward the poor in terms of their basic human rights creates social violence, which is a

Val Plumwood in her essay “Paths Beyond Human-Centeredness,” illustrates the impact that humans have on nature and non-animals when it comes to preserving environments. Understanding that nature has it’s living properties that let it thrive among its resources allows for people to grasp the complexities that come about when construction companies destroy the environment in which they work. Plumwood uses the term dualism to refer to the sharp distinction between two classes of individuals. There is the high class, which is considered as the “One.” In contrast, the other side of the division consists of individuals that are classified as lower and are subordinates to the “One” as “Others.” This account on dualism allows the reader to understand how humans can significantly alter the environment because of the way they perceive its resources and inhabitants. Plumwood defines five characteristics that illustrate the oppressive actions that change the connection between human relations and the relationship between humans and nature.

In his social encyclical, Caritas in veritate, Benedict XVI draws the conclusion that, “the way humanity treats the environment influences the way it treats itself, and vice versa” (Turkson 6). This comment alludes to the common biblical teaching that “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. To further drive his point about interconnectedness, Benedict XVI uses an example about rising energy needs that leads to rising energy price. This problem not only effects poverty stricken people but also effects the natural environment by stripping it of its resources at alarming

I recently just continued my journey to the country Rickston. Like the country Mc's Ville, I walk down the streets noticing the scenery. All of the houses seem to be the same size. It was very unusual to me. Why would these houses be completely alike? All peoples clothing seemed to be alike and throughout the places of the country I visit everything seems to be the same. There is no separation between the rich and poor. I begin to wonder why this country looked like this. I remembered the different aspects of this country. It is a communist country. The reasoning behind the equality became apparent to me. Karl Marx was the influence of this equality. Marx wanted to make everyone equal and to stop people from being placed in classes that separated

White’s thesis in The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis states that in order to confront the expanding environmental crises, humans must begin to analyze and alter their treatment and attitudes towards nature. The slow destruction of the environment derives from the Western scientific and technological advancements made since the Medieval time period. “What people do about their ecology depends on what they think about themselves in relation to things around them” (RON p.7). Technology and science alone will not be able to save humans until we adjust the way of thinking and suppress the old ideas of humans power above nature. Instead, we need to learn how to think of ourselves as being

In a chilling recollection of mankind’s current misdeeds towards the environment in “The End of Nature,” McKibben’s call for action is one paramount to the survival of the human race. In essence, McKibben argues that the futures of both nature and ourselves are delicately yet undeniably interconnected. Furthermore, he urges that “we” (ALL humans) are the deciding chip in said bond. By doing so, McKibben implies that action must be situated if we are to expect any change in such bleak a situation. This argument can clearly be found when McKibben speaks out on a myriad of environmental issues in the past, present, and future. McKibben begins to accustom readers to a pattern in which human ignorance juts out from past environmental experiences.

As poststructuralism would have it, human consciousness is constructed discursively. Our subjectivity is constructed by the shifting discourses of power which endlessly speak through us, situating us here and there in particular positions and relations. In these terms we are not the authors of ourselves. We do not construct our identities, we have it written for us; the subject cannot be sovereign over the construction of selfhood. Instead the subject is decentered, in that its consciousness is always being constructed from positions outside of itself. It follows then that the individual is not a transparent representation of the self but an effect of discourse. Spivak argues that surprisingly for these figures, when Foucault and Deleuze talks about oppressed groups such as the working classes they fall back into precisely these uncritical notions of ‘sovereign subjects’ by restoring to them a fully centred consciousness. In addition they also assume that the writing of intellectuals such as themselves can serve as a transparent medium through which the voices of the oppressed can be represented. The intellectual is cast as a reliable mediator for the voices of the oppressed, a mothpiece through which the oppressed can clearly speak.

In Paul Taylor’s essay, “The Ethics for Respect for Nature,” he argues that… In this paper I will first describe Taylor’s concept of “respect for nature.” I will then explain the part this attitude plays in rationally grounding a biocentric outlook on environmental ethics. Lastly, I will present Rosalind Hursthouse’s criticism of Taylor’s view, and state how Taylor might respond to this criticism.