AndyH
Well-known member
Please consider this as we expand the conversation. For those of you more advanced, have a giggle on me. 
(And please set me straight if I mess this up.) This is at the university freshman level - from Environment, 7th Edition, by Raven/Berg/Hassenzahl.
- Western worldview (expansionist worldview) - considered one end of the spectrum when examining global sustainability. This is anthropocentric and utilitarian. "This perspective mirrors the beliefs of the 18th-century frontier attitude, a desire to conquer and exploit nature as quickly as possible." Humans have a primary obligation only to humans; any concerns about the environment are derived from human interests.
[This is the view that led to deforesting an area in the Midwest the size of Europe in a 40 year period after the Civil War. In Michigan alone, 160 billion board feet of virgin white pine were cut - leaving only 6 billion standing in the entire state.] [[Interesting that the numbers were reported in board-feet and not number of trees, or acres of trees...]]
-- President Roosevelt and his first head of the U.S. Forest Service Gifford Pinchot were utilitarian conservationists - "...they viewed forests in terms of their usefulness for people - such as in providing jobs. Pinchot supported expanding the nation's forest reserves and managing forests scientifically, such as by harvesting trees only at the rate at which they regrow."
- Deep ecology worldview. "...stresses that all forms of life have the right to exist and that humans are not different or separate from other organisms. Humans have an obligation to themselves and to the environment." This is probably best described by words attributed to Chief Sealth/Seattle, Suqwamish and Duwamish, Pacific NW: "This we know - the Earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the Earth. All things are connected like the blood which unites one family. Whatever befalls the Earth befalls the sons of the Earth..." This is a biocentric view - a view that we should protect "nature because all forms of life deserve respect and consideration." John Muir (founder of the Sierra Club) was a biocentric preservationist.
I personally feel that the deniers and the far right in our country are starting from what science considers one extreme - the Western worldview, and are trying to move it farther along the scale.
I see those raising alarm bells based on science to be between these two extremes. (But probably very close to Roosevelt/Pinchot's utilitarian view.)
I resonate with the native view - a biocentric. I do have to admit, though, that I feel a lot closer to the planet when on cross country skis somewhere in Michigan's upper peninsula in mid-January. White pines are beautiful trees.
(And please set me straight if I mess this up.) This is at the university freshman level - from Environment, 7th Edition, by Raven/Berg/Hassenzahl.- Western worldview (expansionist worldview) - considered one end of the spectrum when examining global sustainability. This is anthropocentric and utilitarian. "This perspective mirrors the beliefs of the 18th-century frontier attitude, a desire to conquer and exploit nature as quickly as possible." Humans have a primary obligation only to humans; any concerns about the environment are derived from human interests.
[This is the view that led to deforesting an area in the Midwest the size of Europe in a 40 year period after the Civil War. In Michigan alone, 160 billion board feet of virgin white pine were cut - leaving only 6 billion standing in the entire state.] [[Interesting that the numbers were reported in board-feet and not number of trees, or acres of trees...]]
-- President Roosevelt and his first head of the U.S. Forest Service Gifford Pinchot were utilitarian conservationists - "...they viewed forests in terms of their usefulness for people - such as in providing jobs. Pinchot supported expanding the nation's forest reserves and managing forests scientifically, such as by harvesting trees only at the rate at which they regrow."
- Deep ecology worldview. "...stresses that all forms of life have the right to exist and that humans are not different or separate from other organisms. Humans have an obligation to themselves and to the environment." This is probably best described by words attributed to Chief Sealth/Seattle, Suqwamish and Duwamish, Pacific NW: "This we know - the Earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the Earth. All things are connected like the blood which unites one family. Whatever befalls the Earth befalls the sons of the Earth..." This is a biocentric view - a view that we should protect "nature because all forms of life deserve respect and consideration." John Muir (founder of the Sierra Club) was a biocentric preservationist.
I personally feel that the deniers and the far right in our country are starting from what science considers one extreme - the Western worldview, and are trying to move it farther along the scale.
I see those raising alarm bells based on science to be between these two extremes. (But probably very close to Roosevelt/Pinchot's utilitarian view.)
I resonate with the native view - a biocentric. I do have to admit, though, that I feel a lot closer to the planet when on cross country skis somewhere in Michigan's upper peninsula in mid-January. White pines are beautiful trees.
