Letting the World Grow Old: An Ethos of Countermodernity
Freya Mathews
Mathews takes a position somewhat similar to Leopold stating that the best thing we can do for the world is to live naturally. The thing that is different about these two authors is how they view nature. Mathews defines nature as whatever happens when agents capable of abstract thought let things be. Mathews spends time on the idea of “returning to nature.” “to return to nature is not to restore a set of lost things or attributes, but rather to allow a certain process to begin anew (p.222).” She does not encourage any real renouncement. But suggests that returning to nature is to let the world go its own way.
Freya Matthews
Today in class we discussed the perspective of Freya Matthews. Matthews believes that they we should let things run their own course, and this she defines as nature. Matthews is again ideas such as mowing a yard or raking leaves becuase they are not natural and make us uptight. She is against many of the social constructs that we have created such as consumerism because these types of things are also not natural. Matthews is not for restoring nature as it once was, because she believes this will lead to a cycle of interference by humans, instead she feels that we should just stop and let nature take over. She suggests using the things that we have so that they become part of us, for example our clothes, houses, and other personal possesions instead of just throwing them away and moving on to something else we care little about. We reviewed what a day in the life of Matthews would look like and decided that things such as make up, driving, and working would not be part of them. We also discussed the idea of pets through Matthews perspective. Matthews would approve of pets because they are care free and don’t worry about uneccesary things, and therefore can bring us back to reality.
Alison Rowland-April 10, 2007:
Today in class we discussed Ian Whyte’s article on elephant managment. The class discussed the pros and cons of a complete ban on elephant poaching. We talked of how elephants, in a Shmitz-like mindset, are very majestic creatures and superior to most creatures, i e rabbits. We talked of how elephants are very special and social creatures due to their characteristics and instinctual qualities. We talked of how Taylor would view elephant poaching and how it is adaquate to keep elephant populations at bay. Elephants deem destructive to the environment by uprooting trees and trudging along river banks; they are equivalent to the weight of vans and just as destructive. The Kruger National Park is a haven for many creatures in the heart of africa but increasing elephant populations raise questions regarding their affect on the environment.
Some solutions have been proposed such as translocation and birth control to downsize the birthrate. Whyte proposes that it must be in Africa’s self interest to keep elephants around. Some philosophers think there should be a monetary supplement to legally kill an elephant and that money should go towards conservation, others feel as though the killing should be justified and reluctant to the assasin.
I found an interesting website about the kruger national park. It provides insight and information into the reservation. The park itself monitors population growth among its creatures to keep populations at a healthy level. The website provides information about all of its animals and plants; and, It encourages people to visit and view such animals in their natural habitats.
Good job on this LeAnna– A.
Women Farmers of India’s Deccan Plateau: Ecofeminists Challenge World Elites, V. Rukmini Rao
In class on April 3, 2007 we discussed the article regarding the economically and socially deprived women farmers living on the Deccan Plateau in a state in the south of India. We were given a handout in class to help organize the information from the article, so please find responses below:
Some of the obstacles to economic success in the Deccan Plateau:
1-Pricing System – Lands that used to be farmed were left fallow, and prices were raised for what farmers would get.
2 – Government effort to help some – Electrical pumps were tried to bring water to land, but it ended up that the technology dried out the wells.
3 – Discrimination – Social customs in the state prevailed. A caste system existed, where women have no rights as they are regarded as “untouchables”.
4 – No security net – There was no health insurance/child care. So as soon as women would save a little, someone would get sick and the savings would go towards their care. Also, the more money one could save, the more that extended relations expected to receive monetary help.
5 – Low wages and money lent at 60-120% interest – Women will plant the land and have to wait weeks for their daily wages. They then need to borrow money to get by, but the interest rates are so high, that it leads to a vicious cycle of continuously borrowing money.
6 – Drought – Due to erratic rainfall and bad irrigation, one cannot count on crops for continual food or as an income source.
7 – MONSANTO – New seed varieties contain genetically modified seeds, which are very expensive. Women need to take out loans to afford them, again returning to the borrowing cycle as mentioned above. Also, the seeds only last for one season, and if seeds from one land blow onto another farmer’s land, the owner of the seed has rights to it, and can sue.
In 1983 the Deccan Development Society was set up by professional men to help poor communities develop themselves. At first there were some initial failures, but the second try seemed to help more:
To help, DDS:
1 – Took lower interest loans for food and emergency relief.
2 – Created summer employment so that women could have wages all summer. They helped improve unusable land by doing so.
3 – Women grouped together to lease land and were productive as a group of farmers.
4 – Community seed banks were formed to help reduce dependency on the market. They could save money to form these seed banks because of the group farming on land they leased together.
5 – Some women were eventually able to buy their own land, which obviously provided security for the poor and gave them something to build on.
6 – Women cared for animals and the land. They used the ethic of care to improve the land and animals and not just harvest them for food.
All of these positive changes gave the women the confidence to tackle social issues.
On Freya Mathews: concepts, concerns and agreements
By Brittney Marshall
According to Mathews, NATURE is whatever happens when we allow things, including ourselves, to unfold in there own way, and is therefore a process.
ARTIFICE is what happens when we intervene in order to change the natural processes to concieve ends of our own. This is the wrong action to take according to Mathews.
objections: What about those who are born into poverty? Is it wrong for them to strive for something better if they know that something better could exist? Couldn’t this be considered PROGRESS or COMMODIFICATION ( two concepts that Mathews is against).
Mathews believes that by “living with nature,” what Mathews defines as living within the framework of the given, life processes on earth will in long term be assured. I can agree with this to an extent, harmful impacts of industrialization ( glogal warming, pollution of our water sources, etc.) would come to an end and life on earth might eternally prosper. To be extreme, a meterorite could always cause the end of life on earth, at least for billions or years until the earth restabalizes.
Mathews states that ” Returning to nature is not to restore a set of lost things or attributes, but rather allow a certain process to begin a new.” Mathews really has Leopold’s “thinking like a mountain” concept down. She states that this process can occur in the most urbanized area and the most civilized of people. She also states that this can occur at any time. I find her theory more acceptable because of that point, she is letting us know that it is never too late to “return to nature.”
Mathews believes that in urban areas we can practice returning to nature by allowing things to grow old. She is against redevelopment, but o.k. with adaptation and aesthetic enhancement when needed.
she says, ” Gradually, such a world, left to grow old. rather than erased for the sake of something entirely new, will be absorbed into the larger process of life on earth.” After reading this quote I immediatley thought of the Cooper River Bridge and how it is being used as a man-made reef. Mathews would probably love this practice.
Mathews believes that we should stay in one place for generations in order to create a history with that place.
objection: What if an ecological event causes a place to become inhospitable (i.e. drought), is migrating to greener pastures acceptable or should we stay and attempt to survive for the sake of history?
To Mathews, and I think Leopold would agree, a decreped factory is more natural than a carefully layed out garden of store-bought flowers.
When it comes to the self, uptightness is unatural, we should roam our places of habitation nude, unshaved, and dirty. My only comment is that perhaps I am far too modernized, because I find bad body odor and excessive hair makes me very uncomfortable.
Mathews is against capitalism and all its forms:
I can agree with her concepts on:
consumerism, Industry/business, develoment, profit, and absolutely with automation ( I believe human labour should never be replaced by technology, it should be stopped all together in cases of inhumane treatment).
I disagree the most with her concept on property, she believes that “we should not seek to own the world, but merely belong to it.” Is it not a natural part of all living things to claim a niche that they defend? Isn’t that considered property? Sometimes space and territory is needed in order to maintain an ecological balance.
According to Mathews, we are an invasive species. If we were to stop all forms of capitalism, or most of them, maybe we could become simply a key species.
Mathews battle strategy against capitalism:
Guarilla warfare: get to know the land and its secrets so that you can defend it against industrialization. “reinhabit places earmarked for the inevitable development.”
according to capitalist view: a place not spirtually belonging to someone or a people is “up for grabs.” Mathews believes that we must claim significance of the land and not be bought out. If enough people were to practice this method, where would the developers go?
Schmidtz-
Schmidtz really doesn’t give us a solution to the problem but more of a framework. He says that its between personal and interpresonal morality./ Personal morality means that sacrifices benefit you personally and are mostly for you. interpersonal morality is for everyone and yo must get the consent of everyone involved. You can’t justify personal morality for a whole group. Its very important that one does not fall into the idea that their values are better than anothers because everyone can care but have different situations that affect their values or how they act on them. Everyone has the same priorities:
1. food
2. Future food
3. shelter
4. future shelter
People will do almost anything including something against their values or ideas on what should happen to meet these goals. One solution the class discussed was that if we care once we meet our priorities with left over money we should pay for others to also meet these goals. We must help people meet these priorities before we can argue about benefits and lack there of of actions concerning the environment. An example is the ship breaking business. it is very dangerous and hazardous to the environment but people in third world contries benefit from the money earned participating in this activity. should we ban the unsafe breakign down or allow it to continue for the economic benefit for the people? there is no easy answer.
Letting the World Grow Old: An Ethos of Countermodernity
Freya Mathews
Mathews takes a position somewhat similar to Leopold stating that the best thing we can do for the world is to live naturally. The thing that is different about these two authors is how they view nature. Mathews defines nature as whatever happens when agents capable of abstract thought let things be. Mathews spends time on the idea of “returning to nature.” “to return to nature is not to restore a set of lost things or attributes, but rather to allow a certain process to begin anew (p.222).” She does not encourage any real renouncement. But suggests that returning to nature is to let the world go its own way.
Will Lindsey 3/30/07
Freya Matthews
Today in class we discussed the perspective of Freya Matthews. Matthews believes that they we should let things run their own course, and this she defines as nature. Matthews is again ideas such as mowing a yard or raking leaves becuase they are not natural and make us uptight. She is against many of the social constructs that we have created such as consumerism because these types of things are also not natural. Matthews is not for restoring nature as it once was, because she believes this will lead to a cycle of interference by humans, instead she feels that we should just stop and let nature take over. She suggests using the things that we have so that they become part of us, for example our clothes, houses, and other personal possesions instead of just throwing them away and moving on to something else we care little about. We reviewed what a day in the life of Matthews would look like and decided that things such as make up, driving, and working would not be part of them. We also discussed the idea of pets through Matthews perspective. Matthews would approve of pets because they are care free and don’t worry about uneccesary things, and therefore can bring us back to reality.
Alison Rowland-April 10, 2007:
Today in class we discussed Ian Whyte’s article on elephant managment. The class discussed the pros and cons of a complete ban on elephant poaching. We talked of how elephants, in a Shmitz-like mindset, are very majestic creatures and superior to most creatures, i e rabbits. We talked of how elephants are very special and social creatures due to their characteristics and instinctual qualities. We talked of how Taylor would view elephant poaching and how it is adaquate to keep elephant populations at bay. Elephants deem destructive to the environment by uprooting trees and trudging along river banks; they are equivalent to the weight of vans and just as destructive. The Kruger National Park is a haven for many creatures in the heart of africa but increasing elephant populations raise questions regarding their affect on the environment.
Some solutions have been proposed such as translocation and birth control to downsize the birthrate. Whyte proposes that it must be in Africa’s self interest to keep elephants around. Some philosophers think there should be a monetary supplement to legally kill an elephant and that money should go towards conservation, others feel as though the killing should be justified and reluctant to the assasin.
I found an interesting website about the kruger national park. It provides insight and information into the reservation. The park itself monitors population growth among its creatures to keep populations at a healthy level. The website provides information about all of its animals and plants; and, It encourages people to visit and view such animals in their natural habitats.
http://www.krugerpark.com/
Good job on this LeAnna– A.
Women Farmers of India’s Deccan Plateau: Ecofeminists Challenge World Elites, V. Rukmini Rao
In class on April 3, 2007 we discussed the article regarding the economically and socially deprived women farmers living on the Deccan Plateau in a state in the south of India. We were given a handout in class to help organize the information from the article, so please find responses below:
Some of the obstacles to economic success in the Deccan Plateau:
1-Pricing System – Lands that used to be farmed were left fallow, and prices were raised for what farmers would get.
2 – Government effort to help some – Electrical pumps were tried to bring water to land, but it ended up that the technology dried out the wells.
3 – Discrimination – Social customs in the state prevailed. A caste system existed, where women have no rights as they are regarded as “untouchables”.
4 – No security net – There was no health insurance/child care. So as soon as women would save a little, someone would get sick and the savings would go towards their care. Also, the more money one could save, the more that extended relations expected to receive monetary help.
5 – Low wages and money lent at 60-120% interest – Women will plant the land and have to wait weeks for their daily wages. They then need to borrow money to get by, but the interest rates are so high, that it leads to a vicious cycle of continuously borrowing money.
6 – Drought – Due to erratic rainfall and bad irrigation, one cannot count on crops for continual food or as an income source.
7 – MONSANTO – New seed varieties contain genetically modified seeds, which are very expensive. Women need to take out loans to afford them, again returning to the borrowing cycle as mentioned above. Also, the seeds only last for one season, and if seeds from one land blow onto another farmer’s land, the owner of the seed has rights to it, and can sue.
In 1983 the Deccan Development Society was set up by professional men to help poor communities develop themselves. At first there were some initial failures, but the second try seemed to help more:
To help, DDS:
1 – Took lower interest loans for food and emergency relief.
2 – Created summer employment so that women could have wages all summer. They helped improve unusable land by doing so.
3 – Women grouped together to lease land and were productive as a group of farmers.
4 – Community seed banks were formed to help reduce dependency on the market. They could save money to form these seed banks because of the group farming on land they leased together.
5 – Some women were eventually able to buy their own land, which obviously provided security for the poor and gave them something to build on.
6 – Women cared for animals and the land. They used the ethic of care to improve the land and animals and not just harvest them for food.
All of these positive changes gave the women the confidence to tackle social issues.
On Freya Mathews: concepts, concerns and agreements
By Brittney Marshall
According to Mathews, NATURE is whatever happens when we allow things, including ourselves, to unfold in there own way, and is therefore a process.
ARTIFICE is what happens when we intervene in order to change the natural processes to concieve ends of our own. This is the wrong action to take according to Mathews.
objections: What about those who are born into poverty? Is it wrong for them to strive for something better if they know that something better could exist? Couldn’t this be considered PROGRESS or COMMODIFICATION ( two concepts that Mathews is against).
Mathews believes that by “living with nature,” what Mathews defines as living within the framework of the given, life processes on earth will in long term be assured. I can agree with this to an extent, harmful impacts of industrialization ( glogal warming, pollution of our water sources, etc.) would come to an end and life on earth might eternally prosper. To be extreme, a meterorite could always cause the end of life on earth, at least for billions or years until the earth restabalizes.
Mathews states that ” Returning to nature is not to restore a set of lost things or attributes, but rather allow a certain process to begin a new.” Mathews really has Leopold’s “thinking like a mountain” concept down. She states that this process can occur in the most urbanized area and the most civilized of people. She also states that this can occur at any time. I find her theory more acceptable because of that point, she is letting us know that it is never too late to “return to nature.”
Mathews believes that in urban areas we can practice returning to nature by allowing things to grow old. She is against redevelopment, but o.k. with adaptation and aesthetic enhancement when needed.
she says, ” Gradually, such a world, left to grow old. rather than erased for the sake of something entirely new, will be absorbed into the larger process of life on earth.” After reading this quote I immediatley thought of the Cooper River Bridge and how it is being used as a man-made reef. Mathews would probably love this practice.
Mathews believes that we should stay in one place for generations in order to create a history with that place.
objection: What if an ecological event causes a place to become inhospitable (i.e. drought), is migrating to greener pastures acceptable or should we stay and attempt to survive for the sake of history?
To Mathews, and I think Leopold would agree, a decreped factory is more natural than a carefully layed out garden of store-bought flowers.
When it comes to the self, uptightness is unatural, we should roam our places of habitation nude, unshaved, and dirty. My only comment is that perhaps I am far too modernized, because I find bad body odor and excessive hair makes me very uncomfortable.
Mathews is against capitalism and all its forms:
I can agree with her concepts on:
consumerism, Industry/business, develoment, profit, and absolutely with automation ( I believe human labour should never be replaced by technology, it should be stopped all together in cases of inhumane treatment).
I disagree the most with her concept on property, she believes that “we should not seek to own the world, but merely belong to it.” Is it not a natural part of all living things to claim a niche that they defend? Isn’t that considered property? Sometimes space and territory is needed in order to maintain an ecological balance.
According to Mathews, we are an invasive species. If we were to stop all forms of capitalism, or most of them, maybe we could become simply a key species.
Mathews battle strategy against capitalism:
Guarilla warfare: get to know the land and its secrets so that you can defend it against industrialization. “reinhabit places earmarked for the inevitable development.”
according to capitalist view: a place not spirtually belonging to someone or a people is “up for grabs.” Mathews believes that we must claim significance of the land and not be bought out. If enough people were to practice this method, where would the developers go?
Schmidtz-
Schmidtz really doesn’t give us a solution to the problem but more of a framework. He says that its between personal and interpresonal morality./ Personal morality means that sacrifices benefit you personally and are mostly for you. interpersonal morality is for everyone and yo must get the consent of everyone involved. You can’t justify personal morality for a whole group. Its very important that one does not fall into the idea that their values are better than anothers because everyone can care but have different situations that affect their values or how they act on them. Everyone has the same priorities:
1. food
2. Future food
3. shelter
4. future shelter
People will do almost anything including something against their values or ideas on what should happen to meet these goals. One solution the class discussed was that if we care once we meet our priorities with left over money we should pay for others to also meet these goals. We must help people meet these priorities before we can argue about benefits and lack there of of actions concerning the environment. An example is the ship breaking business. it is very dangerous and hazardous to the environment but people in third world contries benefit from the money earned participating in this activity. should we ban the unsafe breakign down or allow it to continue for the economic benefit for the people? there is no easy answer.