SOC301

In this lecture I shall provide some underlying theory, information and web links that connect to five major themes that weave throughout the first three chapters of Suzuki and Dressel's From Naked Ape to Superspecies. This lecture serves to supplement what you read and help you develop and understand some of the underlying concepts. While the main themes parallel the reading, the content presented here is quite different.

I. Anthropocentrism
[Please see chapter 1 in From Naked Ape to Superspecies]

Anthropocentrism is the activity of viewing everything in terms of the human experience and in terms of human values. In regards to the environment, it is the tendency to limit our focus on that which directly benefits human beings. The problem with maintaining an exclusively anthropocentric perspective is that:
1. We really only end up hurting ourselves since human beings can not survive without attention to the larger web of life on this planet.
2. Such a self-centered perspective has devastating affects on other species.

With regard to the first point: As Paul Shepard, environmental theorist, explains, our entire identity as human beings relies on deep connections with other life. As children we pretend that animals speak to each other and to us. In pretending that animals speak to one another, the child imposes on animals a psuedo-humanity which, although illusory, is the glue of real kinship (Shepard, 34).

Animals provide the symbolic foundations for how we form our identity. The adolescent is understood as being between stages of life, with uncertain identities. In this respect their symbols are the changing species: the self-renewing, skin-shedding snake; the amphibious frog who loses a tail and grows legs; the caterpillar who is metamorphosed into a butterfly. In each the thought of a new birth is manifest, the concrete expression of transformation (Shepard, 35).

Furthermore as we move into adulthood, Shepard explains, Part of becoming adult is the dawning realization that the principle of transformation is a major feature of the cosmos. Movement and passage making are inseparable from time consciousness. In our modern adult life- other than in hunting participated in primarily by men- there is a dearth of experiences with wild animals. In tribal cultures, dancing in the feathers of birds and wearing the masks of mammals displays the shape-shifting capacities of the soul (Shepard, 36).

Ultimately, Self-consciousness is possible only in a world of Others. We are members of a human family and society, but the presence of animal Others enlarges our perception of the self beyond our immediate habitations: not only to the limits of the outer world but deeply inward to that ground of being where we live the lizard, the monkey, and the fish (Shepard, 38).

Beyond our psychological needs, we have a physical dependence on the rest of the living world. Read carefully through chapter one Bugs R Us and discover how in some very real ways Bugs ARE Us.

With respect to the second point, beyond the difficulties for our own mental and physical survival, maintaining an anthropocentric perspective has devastating affects on other species (and this of course does affect us as well).

Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 the term 'endangered species' means any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range other than a species of the Class Insecta determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest whose protection under the provisions of this Act would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man. A threatened species means any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

In The 1997 Species Report Card: The State of U. S. Plants and Animals, it was determined that about two-thirds of the nations species are presently relatively secure. However, about one-third of U. S. plant and animal species are of conservation concern. Certain groups of organisms receive particularly poor marks. Those animals that depend on freshwater habitats- mussels, crayfish, fishes, and amphibians- are the worst condition overall. Flowering plants also receive low marks, with one-third of their many species in trouble, a disturbing 5,144 species. For some, it may be too late- more than 500 U. S. species already may have disappeared forever (http://consci.tnc.org/library/pubs/rptcard/summary.html).

Please review the following websites for further information about the Anthropocentric Perspective:

The Anthropocentric-Ecocentric Debate http://users.aol.com/ThryWoman?AED.html

Forms of Anthropocentrism http://www.kheper.auz.com/topics/worldviews/anthropocentrism.html

Endangered Species http://www.eelink.net/EndSpp

Reference:

II. Interdependancy
[ See From Naked Ape to Superspecies, chapter 2, Bigfoot

I use the term interdependancy to refer to the intricate web of relations among the living world. We do longer recognize the interdependance of other life and each other and this oversight has stunning implications.

We can look at interdependancy in terms of our relationships with the non-human world as is largely discussed in chapter one, Bugs R Us. But we can also look at our interdependancy on each other to provide the resources for survival. For example, where do you get your food? From the grocery store? Okay. But where does that food come from. It comes from all over the world. And yet, do you think about how others obtain their food in order to survive as you eat your sugar from Brazil or your grapes from Chile? As Suzuki and Dressel write, ...we have to remember that while there are far more people in poor countries like India, China, Kenya or the Philippines, more than 80 percent of the planet's resources are being consumed by countries like the United States, Japan, Germany and Canada. If you're a Canadian or an American with only one child, that child will consume more than forty times what two little Bangladeshis will.

Please think about the relationships that we have with not only other species, but within our own as you explore more about interdependancy in the below websites and question some underlying assumptions that we hold with regard to something as simple as eating our next meal.

Interbeing

Interconnectedness

III. Overconsumption and Overpopulation

Suzuki and Dressel explain, Our basic environmental problems are overpopulation and overconsumption. We have the ecological footprint to help us measure our individual and collective impact. But how do we know whether the situation is getting critical? That is, how radically do we have to change and how fast?

I think this is a crucial question. Do we have time to wait? Please explore chapter 2, Bigfoot and the following websites as you think about if we do still have any time left or if we must begin action to transform these basic problems.

Over consumption sites:
Suzuki on Consumption and the Environment http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Dr_David_Suzuki/Article_Archives/weekly07190001.asp

Subvertizing http://www.pbs.org/kcts/affluenza/show/adbusters.html

Test Your Consumption Quotient! http://www.pbs.org/kcts/affluenza/diag/what.html

Overpopulation sites:

World Overpopulation Awareness http://www.overpopulation.org/

Overpopulation of Earth http://www.overpop.org/

Zero Population Growth http://www.zpg.org/

IV. Geological Time vs. Human Time

According to scientist Steve Schneider we can expect between one and four degrees of warming in the next century. Some of this may be due to natural warming, but much of it is likely due to human industry. By and large, most of us can adapt to one degree. But four degrees is virtually the difference between an ice age and a warm epoch like we're in now. It takes nature ten thousand years to make those kinds of changes, and we're talking about changes like that on the order of a century. There isn't an ecologist anywhere who thinks that we can adapt to that without dramatic dislocation to the species in the world, and to agriculture and other patterns of living that depend on the climate (Schneider in Suzuki and Dressel, 59).

The above quote really highlights the difference between geological and human time. We tend to think in terms of how things will affect our own human life, or our children's life. But from the perspective of geological time, such changes within a human lifetime occur in an incredibly short and drastic period of time, with little ability for the climate, ecosystems, etc to adjust. Please review the following websites to understand more about Geological Time. Pay special attention to the minute amount of time that human beings have been on this planet as compared to the drastic transformations that have taken place on this planet due to human industry.

Geological Time Machine http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/help/timeform.html

Comprehending Geologic Time http://www.athro.com/geo/timecalc.html

USGS-Geologic Time http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/contents.html

Please explore more about global warming at:

Green Peace and Global Warming http://www.greenpeace.org/~climate/climatecountdown

EPA and Global Warming http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/

The Other Side of the Debate http://www.globalwarming.org/brochure.html

V. Environmental Language
[See From Naked Ape and Superspecies, chapter 3, Sez Who?]

Suzuki and Dressel cover much territory in chapter three regarding the relationship between the environmental movement and the media. What I want to do here is point out how language is USED to influence our beliefs and consequently our actions.

Language is connected to images which are connected to our thoughts and perceptions which are connected to action.

Language ---> thoughts, beliefs and perceptions -----> action and behavior

Thus, if we start out with a word like Dog we immediately form an image. For me, I think about my dog Sparky. I see him with his one eye, half an ear, hopping around on three legs, because one of his legs gets terrible arthritis.

This image is connected to my thoughts and perceptions. For instance, when I see him I think about how Sparky has a real thirst for life. He got into a car accident when he was a puppy, but he is the most liveliest dog I know. He is the only dog who is free in our neighborhood. All of the other dogs live behind fences. So Sparky likes to have fun with these other dogs by racing along the fences (he runs really fast) and having the fenced-in dogs run along with him. The fenced-in dogs inevitably run into the end of the fence and fall backwards, while Sparky keeps running, then stops, and looks back. He must be saying, na na na na na.... I'm free and you're not. And on and on, I think about my spunky dog Sparky and his love for life and mischievous behavior.

These thoughts lead to my own behavior. For instance, I admire Sparky's wild love for life. I could never fence him in because I know that it would just break his spirit. The choices I make are connected to my ideas, beliefs and perceptions about Sparky.

Now let's take a broader example as it relates to the course. Take the word, animal. We all have different thoughts and ideas about the word animal. It conjures up different idea. Many of these ideas are rooted within the cultures in which we were raised. For example, if you have grown up in a Western culture and you see a dead animal on the side of the road, you might feel sad that the animal is dead, but your action would be to pass by it. That is because your perceptions of animals have been shaped by the culture in which you live. You would probably not even consider picking up the animal and burying it. Even the suggestion of doing such a thing might strike you as strange or dangerous. After all, what diseases might the animal have? Your behavior is shaped by your ideas. Your ideas come largely from the culture in which you grew up. If you were born and raised in a traditional family on the Navajo reservation, you would probably have a very different response. In this case, if you saw a dead animal on the side of the road you might view the animal as a dead relative. You might get out of your car, bring the animal into the woods, say a prayer and lay it to rest. Thus your behavior would be quite different because of how your culture has influenced your ideas and perceptions associated with animals.

Thus, your actions differ dependent upon culture
In the U.S., if a kid hides her veggies under mashed potatoes, what would her parents say? They might say, If you don't eat your veggies you won't grow up to be big and strong.
However, in Japan the parents might respond, How will the gardener who grew them for you feel or How will your vegetables feel as they spent all their lives growing up just for you.

In the U.S. we value individualism and competition. If you don't grow big and strong, you won't be able to compete. Japan values communalism and strong social obligations.
These different value systems affect how we behave and act.

Ultimately, language which is part of culture, is connected to action. If language is connected to your action than it can be used to manipulate action or inaction. It has the power to label people and to influence our thinking about what is right and wrong, who is good and bad. During the Cold War, Russians were described as savages and barbarians. Their method of behavior was deemed brutal, treacherous, conniving, aggressive, animalistic Such labeling had the effect of constructing enemies out of the Russian people and uniting Americans against the Russians and in support of American foreign policy.

The public is similarly manipulated so as to get the majority to support or not support certain environmental action. For example: look at the word, responsible development. Where did this word come from? Is responsible development truly responsible? Or is it used as a way to legitimize continued development of the land? What is responsible? Is it responsible to have homes heated and cooled by passive solar lighting? Perhaps. But what happens when responsible development has stretched over acres and acres of land that was once forest, desert, mountain range, etc. What are the real effects to the environment? How is language used to manipulate YOUR understanding of environmental protection?

Here's another example. Last year there was a debate about how much state trust land to preserve in Arizona. The conservative estimate was 3 percent of state land should be preserved. The environmentalists, were deemed radical for proposing to preserve 10 percent of the land. Anyone who had suggested a larger amount would have been considered loony. The parameters of acceptability were set and to break past those barriers was not aloud. This is the way to keep an environmental movement very conservative. By labeling suggestions of preservation as radical you set the range in which preservation can really occur. This is how language manipulates.

Go on to Reflecting on Themes
or
Go back to Poisoning Ourselves

E-mail Janine Minkler at Janine.Minkler@nau.edu
Call Janine Minkler at (928) 523-7482

Copyright 2002 Northern Arizona University
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED