More handpicked essays just for you.
The impact of human activities on the environment
The impact of human activities on the environment
Importance of nature conservation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the last hundred years, over 160 species of flora and fauna equating to millions have gone extinct (“The Sixth Extinction”, 2013). The harmful and selfish acts of man, with absolute disregard for the lives of non-human organisms, have caused colossal and devastating damage to the earth (Bekoff, 2014). All these destructive actions have been themed by Bekoff as “unwilding”. We are living in the Anthropocene, the age of humans. In a world where “unwilding” has unfortunately become a norm. Rewilding is the opportunity for us humans to reverse the destruction we have brought upon the natural world (Monbiot, 2013) if we humans did not “unwild”, rewilding would not be necessary now (Bekoff, 2014). Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to examine and evaluate the issues fuelling the controversy between proponents advocating rewilding, and opposition groups. It studies the movement of rewilding the earth, and the “rewilding” of people’s hearts (Bekoff, 2014), together with their positive impacts. In addition, it looks at the potential obliteration of our …show more content…
The cultivation of compassion and empathy in our daily lives is the first step towards rewilding our hearts. It is a dynamic process, we need to learn to see and treat animals as sentient beings. Furthermore, foster the relationship between humans and the rest of the natural world to coexist as one (Bekoff, 2014). “Rewilding is an attitude. It's also a guide for action. As a social movement, it needs to be proactive, positive, persistent, patient, peaceful, practical, powerful…” (Bekoff, 2014). Each of us must make the effort to live consciously and unselfishly; only then will we begin to perceive civilized things through wild eyes. By rewilding our hearts we will not only live richer, more fulfilling, vibrant lives of adventure, but we will transform the world we live in; for ourselves and future generations (What is Human Rewilding?,
In the article “The Baby in the Well: The Case Against Empathy,” Paul Bloom puts forward a tendentious thesis. Empathy, according to him, is overrated. The imaginative capacity to put oneself in the place of an oppressed, afflicted, or bereaved person does not lead to rational, thoroughly-considered solutions to important problems. Indeed, it can lead to hysterical displays of ill-directed charity, the misallocation of resources, and total blindness to other significant issues. Bloom appeals to his readers’ sense of logic by using examples of environmental and geopolitical crises that require forward-thinking solutions; he suggests that, because of the need to think about the future and the big picture, a politics of empathy cannot be relied
As time passes, our population continues to increase and multiply; yet, on the other hand, our planet’s resources continue to decrease and deplete. As our population flourishes, human beings also increase their demands and clamor for the Earth’s natural products, yet are unable to sacrifice their surplus of the said resources. Garret Hardin’s work highlighted the reality that humans fail to remember that the Earth is finite and its resources are limited. Hardin’s article revealed that people are unable to fathom that we indeed have a moral obligation to our community and our natural habitat — that we are not our planet’s conquerors but its protectors. We fail to acknowledge and accept that we only have one Earth and that we must protect and treasure it at all costs. Despite all our attempts at annihilating the planet, the Earth will still be unrelenting — it will still continue to be present and powerful. Human beings must recognize that we need this planet more than it needs us and if we persist on being egocentric and covetous, in the end it is us who will
The two essays “On Compassion” and “This is Water” by Barbara Ascher and David Wallace argue their different viewpoints on both compassion and empathy. While Ascher simply argues that compassion is not a simple character trait but more so a skill acquired overtime; Wallace tries to convince his audience that humans are preprogramed to be motivated by their own selfish desires and must reprogram themselves to think out of sympathy and concern for others.
Daniel Duane addresses a pressing modern anxiety surrounding technology’s destruction of the natural world. Duane is an author of seven books and many articles featured in The New York Times and Food & Wine. Also an editor for Men’s Journal, Duane’s experiences in rock climbing, science, and the beauty of the outdoors make his writings seem more passionate and credible. He recently wrote the article “The Unnatural Kingdom” in The New York Times explaining his ideas towards technological advancements and their effects on wildlife. In his article, Duane offers insights to the question, “If technology helps save the wilderness, will the wilderness still be wild?” (Duane 1). He utilizes kairos, pathos, ethos, logos, and other rhetorical devices,
Compassion has became something rare in our society, and something that a lot of people lack. The author, Barbara Lazear Ascher, explains to us that compassion is not a character trait, but rather something that we learn along the way with the help of real life situations we encounter, such as the ones she encountered herself. Ascher persuades her audience that compassion is not just something you are born with by using anecdotes, rhetorical questions, and allusions.
Human beings are prideful creatures, and we have good reason to be. We have subdued a planet, changed the course of rivers, watered deserts, written poetry to make angels cry, and wrapped the world in a network of electric impulses and digital displays. We have created and killed not one but many gods. We can make a cloud rain by shooting heavy metal into it, and we can create a lake by pouring concrete in a canyon and damming a river. Most days, it seems that we human beings have everything under control and that if we miss wild nature, well, we can grow it in our gardens. (We can even genetically engineer the plants and animals.) Every so often, however, the universe spins out of our control. Forest fires rage. The earth quakes. Chaos descends like a great modern Zeus hurling thunderbolts and reminding us that nature is not ours to manipulate. In a great universe shaped by raw power and force, human beings are only small, easily crushed, organic structures. We need the reminder. Chaos and destruction are nature’s great gift to human kind because the realization of our frailty and insignificance leads to enlightenment. We learn something about ourselves, how we are here, where we want to go, and what we have to say about it.
In Jeff VanderMeer’s Annihilation, the author makes certain that the environment, laws, and beings of “Area X” are alienated and abnormal compared to the rest of Earth. However, the perplexing world created by Vandermeer is not meant only to create a sense of estrangement, but to force a reconsideration of what the concept of humanity actually means. The definition of humanity is broadened through the unique lense of the book, and the author suggests that human society must be thought of more in terms of the natural environment which it destroys. The Biologist, as we get to know her, is central in VanderMeer’s challenge to the commonly held conception of humanity, due to her literal transformation away from being a purely “human” specimen.
Extinction is no longer just a natural process. It is an enemy, slowly changing our world into a barren wasteland where life is as rare as a flower in the Arctic Circle's winter. The wolf, the tiger, the caribou, the elephant, the bison, the cheetah, the sequoia cactus, the redwood tree – all of these and so many more things are on the verge of disappearing from our planet forever. Extinction is the most pressing environmental issue of our time, because if it continues the way it is going without anything being done to counteract its causes and consequences, there will soon be no environment left for there to be debates about.
“The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality.”(Arthur Schopenhauer)
Anthropocentrism has been a central belief upon which modern human society has been constructed. The current state of the world, particularly the aspects that are negative, are reflective of humans continuously acting in ways that are in the interest of our own species. As environmental issues have worsened in recent decades, a great number of environmentalists are turning away from anthropocentric viewpoints, and instead adopting more ecocentric philosophies. Although anthropocentrism seems to be decreasing in popularity due to a widespread shift in understanding the natural world, philosopher William Murdy puts forth the argument that anthropocentrism still has relevancy in the context of modern environmental thought. In the following essay, I will explain Murdy’s interpretation of anthropocentrism and why he believes it to be an acceptable point of
The ethical system that I propose has the goal of what is ultimately good for human beings. The ultimate good of human beings lie in going beyond their individual needs because instinctually animals strive to fulfill their individual bio-organic ne...
Furthermore, while zoos should conserve and encourage educational experiences within their parks, Allen points out it’s also important to take a compassionate approach in caring for each individual animal. As zoos focus more on education and conservation, they sometimes forget that animals are not alive in terms of population and individual welfare is important. Thus, it appears that Allen is taking a middle ground approach to the ongoing debate about zoos, because she is open to zoos, when they are compassionate, yet fully recognizes the downside of animal cruelty.
The ugly truth is that animals are dying at the hands of their owners everyday, some in very violent ways that can be avoidable given the right solution. Slaughterhouses, puppy mills, dog fighting, and so on, are just a few examples of how animals are being treated badly by people. Animal cruelty is a form of violence which, un...
According to the ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty), the first humane organization, founded in 1866, in the Western Hemisphere that works to rescue animals from abuse and pass humane laws, the definition of animal cruelty is “acts of violence or neglect perpetrated against animals.” This definition is presented in a paper written by Learning To Give, an organization that teaches children to give back, take voluntary citizen action, and engage civilly and presents it through a philanthropist approach. Animal cruelty is an atrocious act that needs to be understood and not undermined. It is easy to push something to the back of our minds and put ourselves in denial when the issue is not right in front of our faces. Many of us know animal cruelty exists, but how many of us know how prevalent it is? Acknowledgement of the problem is the only way we can begin to solve it.
Anthropocentrism is the school of thought that human beings are the single most significant entity in the universe. As a result, the philosophies of those with this belief reflect the prioritization of human objectives over the well-being of one’s environment. However, this is not to say that anthropocentric views neglect to recognize the importance of preserving the Earth. In fact, it is often in the best interests of humans to make concerted efforts towards sustaining the environment. Even from a purely anthropocentric point of view, there are three main reasons why mankind has a moral duty to protect the natural world.