Ethos: The Practical Ethics Blog

This essay is a continuation of two prior posts:
Genes, Genesis and God: Introduction
Genes, Genesis and God: Natural Genesis

Cultural Genesis
According to Holmes Rolston, in the story of the genesis of value, human culture arises out of and transcends nature. Cultural value, however, should not be confused with natural value. Biologically speaking, value refers to “whatever traits an organism has that are valuable to it, relative to its survival” (39). The organism is a valuer, albeit not a conscious one, because it defends its life. Its inherent traits are good for it, “good-for-its-kind,” and good for its ecological niche (39-41). By virtue of it being exactly what it is, it has intrinsic value without reference to anything or anyone outside of it (although every organism, including humans, also has value to others (instrumental value [41]).

Humans misvalue nature when they evaluate it in terms of moral goodness. Rolston argues that it is only appropriately valued in terms of nonmoral goodness. An animal killing for survival, for example, is not analogous to killing in human culture. Describing such behavior, for instance as selfish, is to read culture into nature. Part of the human genius is that we rise to a level of consciousness where morality is possible. This means we are held to different standards of goodness (81-84).

The human mind has co-evolved with genes. But far from being determined by them, genes have enabled the mind to break free of, to use E.O. Wilson’s metaphor, the “genetic leash” (120). Sociobiologists argue that the human intellect is a product of natural selection, constructed to maximize the production of offspring. Cultural traits (“a marriage custom, a religious belief, a dietary preference, a clean shaven face”) work in service to genetic propagation (126). Rolston disagrees, arguing that, although the human mind is biologically based (i.e., we do have genetic propensities), it is distinctly designed to build “cumulative transmissible cultures” (109).

Such capacity requires mental flexibility so that humans are able to create diverse cultures, and evaluate options within the fast-pace of cultural environments, both for their functional usefulness and for their contribution to a meaningful life. Genetic changes simply cannot keep up with cultural ones (117). In addition, there is no straight causal chain linking genes to propensities to cultural traits. For example, “a set of propensities that is an adaptive fit for life in rural Nebraska might result in reduced fitness…in Boston (127). Again, what is important here is a mind that can adapt to changing cultural circumstances.

Works cited Rolston III, Holmes. Genes, Genesis and God: Values and Their Origins in Natural and Human History. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1999.

Painting: “Red Road, Red Spirit Woman,” Pamela Yates, copyright Pamela Yates (www.pamelayates.com)

Karin Lauria :: Oct.30.2007 :: Environmental Studies, Ethics, Human-Animal Studies, Religion :: 1 Comment »

The following essay is the introduction from a paper I wrote on Genes, Genesis and God by environmental philosopher Holmes Rolston. I’ll post subsequent sections over the next several days.

Introduction

In a 2003 interview on Radio National, environmental philosopher Holmes Rolston III stated that science and religion need to come together in dialogue. Each has its own integrity: science, he asserted, “gets at the causes of things,” while religion “gets at the meaning” (Kohn). But their concerns do overlap in that each has something to say about the natural world and the character of humanity. In Genes, Genesis and God, Rolston does not explicitly discuss how this dialogue might work. He does, however, suggest where the crossroads of conversation might be located.

Location is a core theme of this book. Rolston challenges readers to think carefully about where humanity stands in the story of the genesis of life on Earth. There’s an urgent reason for doing this: we are imperiling the planet. At first glance, the book might come off as a treatise against scientific reductionism, particularly against the pejorative metaphor of genetic selfishness. But such reductionism is merely symptomatic of our confusion about cultural and natural values. Instead, Rolston’s driving concern is that “the place of valuing in natural and cultural history has not yet been adequately interpreted” (xiv). Even more so, “it has too often been misinterpreted,” or misvalued, as humans tend largely to view nature in terms of cultural values and what value it has for them (xiv).

This book, then, is about getting the story of natural and cultural values straight so that humans understand what an appropriate and healthy relationship with nature looks like. What Rolston wants to tell us is the story of “the genesis of value,” (the “Earth story”) so that we might know “what is of value,” what value means, and how value is shared in the domains of nature and culture (xiv).

Science and religion enter this picture as realms of cultural genius that have emerged out the Earth narrative. They stand in relationship to nature and to each other. Before discussing this relationship and especially spaces for conversation, we need first to know something about the key dimensions of Rolston’s telling of the story. The next two essays in this series will provide this background. Those that follow will explore possible points of dialogue between science and religion and offer a critique of Rolston’s work.

Works Cited

Kohn, Rachel (2003, Dec. 14). Interview with Holmes Rolston III about Genesis, Genes, and God in “In the Spirit of Things.” Radio National. Retrieved June 20, 2007 from http://www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/spirit/stories/s1005831.htm

Rolston III, Holmes. Genes, Genesis and God, Values and their Origins in Natural and Human History. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1999.

Photo: My copy of Genes, Genesis and God. Note the damage. My dog chewed the binding and the upper right corner. The binding is held together by white duct tape. I call this photo, “Genes, Genesis, and Dog.”

Technorati Tags: animals, environment, nature, religion, theology

Karin Lauria :: Oct.30.2007 :: Environmental Studies, Ethics, Human-Animal Studies, Religion :: No Comments »

Sometimes a national news story hits home in a particularly powerful way and demands a response. If you are like many people who listen to the news, you have already heard about the October 9th incident where an unidentified person left a four-foot “hanging noose” on the office door of Dr. Madonna Constantine, an African-American professor of counseling and clinical psychology at Columbia University’s Teachers College.

This sinister act of racist intimidation, which painfully evokes the over 5,000 victims of racist lynching in our nation’s history, has also rightly struck a nerve in professional groups like the American Psychological Association and at many of America’s colleges and universities, including Antioch University New England.

I first heard about this painful incident from Gargi Roysircar, a colleague of mine who works in the Clinical Psychology Department at Antioch New England. For Dr. Roysircar, this premeditated act of racism was personal in two key ways. First, like Dr. Constantine, Dr. Roysircar is a scholar of color doing research on racism and the multicultural counseling competencies needed by psychology practitioners in the 21st century. She is thus a potential target for similar threats. Second, as she wrote to the Antioch community, “My students in the Human Diversity course read her articles. Madonna and I have grown up together in our respective careers. Just this year I co-authored an article with her.” This situation is very personal for Dr. Roysircar and the other psychology faculty members at Antioch who have worked with Dr. Constantine.

Is it also personal for a white environmental studies professor whose office is on the other side of the building from Dr. Roysircar and who never heard of Dr. Constantine before a few weeks ago? I think so. I am a firm believer that an injury to one is an injury to all. I was thus moved by Dr. Roysircar’s passionate call for all Antioch New England students, faculty, and staff to find ways to address the issue of both overt and subtle racism at Columbia University–and at our own institution.

This process has begun. A support group on campus called Students for Ethnic and Racial Diversity worked with Dr. Roysircar and crafted a heartfelt and poetic petition in solidarity with Dr. Constantine. They gathered more than 150 signatures on Antioch New England’s campus in less than a week and sent their petition on to Dr. Constantine. As the petition said, “We want scholars to continue doing valuable research in safety and freedom and not to have to pay the price of their well-being and human dignity for their academic pursuits and/or their ethnic, racial, and cultural affiliation or identity.”

David Caruso, the President of Antioch New England, also issued a public statement saying, “This abhorrent incident is a harsh reminder of the persistence of prejudice and racism in our culture, and of the effort we must make together to confront such hate-based behavior and develop and implement strategies to promote positive change.” More personally, Dr. Caruso sent a letter of support directly to Dr. Constantine on behalf of the entire faculty, staff, and student body of Antioch New England.

On October 17, Antioch New England’s Faculty Senate unanimously passed a support resolution for Dr. Constantine stating, “We believe that the core values of freedom, justice, mutual respect, and universal human rights–which should be at the heart of every academic institution—need to be defended. The struggle against white supremacy is not over.”

Yet, making statements in support of Dr. Constantine is not enough. As the Senate resolution went on to say: “We believe that this is a teachable moment at academic institutions across the country, one that could allow for deepened discussion and insight into the dynamics of racism and other forms of oppression–as well as an opportunity for all of us to learn how to support each other, be better allies, and stand up for justice and decent treatment for all. We urge all our students and faculty to find ways–in our respective spheres of influence–to reach out and support Dr. Constantine and the understandably upset faculty and students at Teachers College, while also building an ever stronger community of racial solidarity and trust right here at Antioch University New England.”

The trick, of course, is how to spark deep conversations at our campus and in the wider community about the nature and persistence of racism and how we can act together to bring us all closer to Martin Luther King’s vision of America as a Beloved Community.

At Antioch, more of us are now reading articles, discussing diversity issues together, and organizing workshops that do more than help us make statements against overt racist acts like the one directed against Dr. Constantine. As Dr. Roysircar says, “Let us not overlook subtle racism and unconscious racial microaggressions that racial and ethnic minorities, women, and those less privileged experience daily.” Now is the time, she says, “to build cross-cultural bridges of respect to reach one another and all people.”

This is true at Columbia, at Antioch, at other universities–and it is also true in our city governments, our nonprofit organizations, our religious congregations, and our businesses. Now the hard work begins.

Best,
Steve

P.S. To read the full text of David Caruso’s letter, or the ANE Faculty Senate Resolution, go to http://eaop-blog.blogspot.com and scroll down one post.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Steve Chase, Ph.D.
Director, Environmental Advocacy and Organizing Program
Department of Environmental Studies @ Antioch University New England
40 Avon Street, Keene, NH 03431
Steven_Chase@antiochne.edu; 603-283-2336 (office); 603-357-0718 (fax)

* EAOP’s Main Website: http://www.antiochne.edu/es/eao/
* EAOP’s “Well-Trained Activist” Blog: http://eaop-blog.blogspot.com
* EAOP Radio Interview: http://www.antiochne.edu/es/eao/radio.cfm
* EAOP’s Online Activist Bookstore: http://www.antiochne.edu/es/eao/bookstore.cfm
(7.5% of the purchase price is donated to the EAOP Scholarship Fund at no extra cost to you)

________________

Steve Chase :: Oct.28.2007 :: Ethics :: No Comments »

The following is a continuation of a prior post, Genes, Genesis and God: Introduction.

Natural Genesis
A recent New York Times article reported that there is a growing concern among evolutionary biologists that science is in need of a Darwinian paradigm shift. The reasons for this involve the failure of the current evolutionary paradigm, known as the “modern synthesis,” to explain how biodiversity occurs and how natural processes and the behaviors of species may affect the course of evolutionary history (Erwin).

Holmes Rolston might add that neither does it explain the rise in complexity of life forms. Resistance to the new paradigm may have to do with a rejection of any suggestion that nature is teleologic. Grand narratives, after all, are out of style among orthodox biologists (a.k.a., the selfish gene theorists [Rolston, xv]).

Although Rolston is not necessarily presenting us with a grand narrative, he explicitly argues that there is a build up of diversity and complexity in nature which arises out of a historical accumulation and transmission, a sort of sharing of genetic know-how (x). In Rolston’s words, “Something is learned across evolutionary history: how to make more diverse and more complex kinds” (1).

Painting: “Seventh Generation,” Pamela Yates, copyright Pamela Yates (www.pamelayates.com)

Continue Reading »

Karin Lauria :: Oct.23.2007 :: Environmental Studies, Ethics, Human-Animal Studies, Religion :: 2 Comments »

Is it possible to use theory and intellect to draw deeply complicated conclusions about silly, simple pop culture art? I faced this question in the writing of my Master’s thesis, in which I used such illustrious examples of animal imagery as Mr. Winkle (see photo, right). For many reasons, my answer to this question is a resounding yes, but it is difficult to convince scholars that there is academic and cultural value in guilty pleasures.

I’m raising this point because of a Very Special Episode of Grey’s Anatomy the other week, in which one of the doctors (an MD for humans) saves a deer. The episode addresses the issue of childhood attachment to animals. It can potentially be read for its commentary on the legitimacy of adult empathy for nonhumans. However, in discussing the episode with my husband, I realized that the more interesting issue at hand was expressed in a question I posed: Would people stop taking me seriously as a writer and animal advocate if I wrote about a trashy soap-opera like Grey’s Anatomy? It seemed to me that the answer, yet again, was a resounding yes.

So here is the dilemma: latent and explicit meanings embedded in pop culture can reveal societal paradigms in their purest form, yet pop culture is often viewed as mindless entertainment that is devoid of greater worth. How can these intertwined and opposing viewpoints be resolved? To start with, by establishing why pop culture is worthwhile.

In the book From Art to Politics: How Artistic Creations Shape Political Conceptions (1995), author Murray Edelman explains how and why art and popular culture can provide insight into every day life. Edelman says that “part of the meaning of artistic talent is the ability to sense feelings, ideas, and beliefs that are widespread in society in some latent form, perhaps as deep structures or perhaps as unconscious feelings, and to objectify them in a compelling way (p 52).” If art synthesizes basic beliefs, then scholars ought to be able to learn a great deal from studying art.

To summarize some of Edelman’s relevant points, what we see and hear is constructed and influenced by imagery that we all have acess to. This means that in addition to personal interpretations of art, our culture has a collective understanding of images as well. This is what makes art an integral part of political behavior, attitudes, virtues and vices. When art and the mind are applied to real world situations, they can influence and transform beliefs about the social world, problems, solutions, hopes, fears, past, present, and future. Kitsch art, “art that sentimentalizes everyday experiences (p. 29),” has just as profound an impact on the social and political world as any other form of art. And kitsch art, more than any other form of art, leads to a unique dilemma.

The study of popular culture (kitsch in particular) suffers from an unusual problem. A lot of pop culture art — not all, but a lot — lacks quality. It is not often that a field of study is generated from lackluster product. In the study of popular culture, scholars ask their audience to accept the intellectual rigor of their research, even though the topic of their study may have none. Unfortunately, in the eyes of many critics, the scholar’s ranking as a legitimate academic is only justified by the quality of his subject of study. For instance, an academic who writes about the Sopranos might be warmly received because of the artistic merit of the TV show, whereas an academic who writes about Grey’s Anatomy would get the cold shoulder because the show’s ambitions go no further than entertainment. And yet, there might be as much useful commentary generated from fluff about Meredith and McDreamy as there is from Tony and his gang. Again, it’s the integrity of the analysis, not the quality of the art being viewed, that ought to determine academic worth.

It is dangerous when scholarship is judged by the subject or topic being studied, and not by the academic rigor of the research. Yet, this does happen, and anyone in the field of human-animal studies has intimate knowledge of this idiosyncrasy. Because animals are not taken seriously as a worthwhile academic interest (aside from biological) many scholars in human-animal studies experience a lack of respect for their work — even if the quality of their studies are stellar. When the study of animals is combined with the study of popular culture, scholars may be digging themselves into an academic grave.

Steve Baker, author of Picturing the Beast: Animals, Identity and Representation (2001) offers a perspective that compliments Edelman’s theories about pop culture. Baker asserts, “much of our understanding of human identity and our thinking about the living animal reflects — and may even be the rather direct result of — the diverse uses to which the concept of the animal is put in popular culture, regardless of how bizarre or banal some of those uses may seem (p. 4).” Like Edelman, Baker places value in even the most frivolous imagery of popular culture representations. Using a butter TV commercial and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles as examples, he explains that any understanding of animals is reliant on our understanding of their cultural representations. Baker explains that animal imagery is purely a human construction and is not an accessible reality. Thus, understanding greater cultural mentality about animals will come from exploring the meaning, both latent and explicit, in these manufactured representations.

Without placing judgments on either the symbolic animal or the real animal, it is possible to recognize value in exploring their qualities as mutually informing influences. For example, it is almost impossible to interact with a live pig without thinking (consciously or not) of the charming personality of Babe, Wilbur or Gordy. The childish voice and do-gooder nature of these pigs have created a lasting mythology around the innocent kindness of an entire species. This symbolism is based on fictitious human-made creatures, but the influence on the real is undeniable. The artistic quality of the films from which these pigs came is subject to debate. But the truth is, Babe, Wilbur and Gordy do not have to come from artistic masterpieces in order to generate, influence or reflect cultural attitudes towards animals. It is for this reason that scholars ought spend time evaluating and theorizing about popular culture and, in particular, instances of animals in popular culture — even if such studies are tantamount to academic suicide.

To return to the question with which I began this essay: Is it possible to use theory and intellect to draw deeply complicated conclusions about silly, simply pop culture art? I’ll reiterate again, yes. I’ve outlined here some of the many reasons why. But finally, let’s return to the question that began my thoughts on this subject: Would people stop taking me seriously as a writer and animal advocate if I wrote about a trashy soap-opera like Grey’s Anatomy? Unfortunately, I think the answer is still yes, but perhaps with room for change.

Citations:
Baker, S. (2001). Picturing the Beast: Animals, Identity and Representation. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Edelman, M.J. (1995) From Art to Politics: How Artistic Creations Shape Political Conceptions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Regan, L.J. (2001). What is Mr. Winkle? New York: Random House.

Lisa Brown :: Oct.17.2007 :: Art, Human-Animal Studies :: No Comments »

In honor of Blog Action Day, I’m starting a list of the things I hate about global warming (besides the fact that it threatens most life on this planet). I’ll add more as I think of them.

Things I hate about global warming:

• Mowing my lawn later into the year
• Finding ticks on my dogs in December
• 90 degree days in October
• The possibility that one day, I’ll be able to see the ocean from my front steps (I’m 30 miles from the coast)
• The possibility that my insurance company will one day cancel my homeowner’s policy (see above bullet and this article from the New York Times)
• Daffodils done blooming by February
• Mom reminiscing about the old days when it snowed (I mean really snowed)
• Less need for heavy sweaters
• Bickering over how much of it is human caused, as if there are no moral reasons for caring about animals and nature
• People who say “It’s nothing that science can’t find the solution for!”

Karin Lauria :: Oct.16.2007 :: Environmental Studies, Ethics, Human-Animal Studies :: No Comments »

Late last year I participated in a roundtable discussion on human-wildlife conflict. The panel included Jan Dizard, a prominent environmental sociologist from Amherst College. You can read the article based on this roundtable by downloading the pdf. The article itself was written by Lesley Limon and published in the Tufts Veterinary Medicine magazine.

Citation: Limon, Lesley (2006) How Close? How Personal?, Tufts Veterinary Medicine 7 (3), 12-16.

William Lynn :: Oct.14.2007 :: Environmental Studies, Ethics, Human-Animal Studies :: No Comments »

Marc Bekoff and Cara Lowe have a new book out. You can read the publishers blurb below. (Does this guy every sleep?)

cheers, Bill

---

Marc Bekoff and Cara Blessley Lowe. 2007. Listening to Cougar, University of Oklahoma Press.Edited by Marc Bekoff and Cara Blessley Lowe with a foreword by Jane Goodall, this spellbinding tribute to Puma concolor honors the big cat’s presence on the land and in our psyches. In some essays, the puma appears front and center: a lion leaps over Rick Bass’s feet, hurtles off a cliff in front of J. Frank Dobie, gazes at Julia Corbett when she opens her eyes after an outdoor meditation, emerges from the fog close enough for poet Gary Gildner touch. Marc Bekoff opens his car door for a dog that turns to be a lion. Other works evoke lions indirectly. Biologists describe aspects of cougar ecology, such as its rugged habitat and how males struggle to claim territory. Conservationists relate the political history of America’s greatest cat. Short stories and essays consider lions’ significance to people, reflecting on accidental encounters, dreams, Navajo beliefs, guided hunts, and how vital mountain lions are to people as symbols power and wildness. Marc Bekoff has published twenty books, including The Emotional Lives of Animals, and is a professor emeritus of ecology evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Writer and photographer Cara Blessley Lowe is author Spirit of the Rockies and co-founder of The Cougar Fund.

William Lynn :: Oct.14.2007 :: Environmental Studies, Human-Animal Studies :: No Comments »

So.

I facilitated a working group at Tufts the other day. It was a rewarding if long day. When I walked back to my car, I found this note on the window shield.

Am I a lucky professor to have such a thoughtful group of students or what!?

Thank you everyone!

‘;-)

Cheers.

William Lynn :: Oct.11.2007 :: Student Space :: No Comments »

The cover story of this month’s American Photo is about the intersection of public policy, activism and art. More specifically, it’s about the role that photography plays in the conservation movement. Read the fantastic introductory article by going to American Photo. Then peruse the beautiful work of the photographers they highlight like Xi Zhinong, whose images of the extremely rare snub-nosed monkeys (above) “precipitated a logging ban by the [Chinese] national government.”

Enjoy!

–Lisa

Lisa Brown :: Oct.07.2007 :: Art, Human-Animal Studies :: No Comments »

In my Kill Bill post I extol the virtues of the open source software — Linux OS, Open Office, Firefox, Thunderbird, etc — and the movement that seeks to liberate users from the vagaries of the Windows environment, the frustrations of Microsoft products, and the greed of irresponsible global corporations. Governments, ngos and individuals across the world are using open source to leverage the power of the internet.

A new development in this respect is the $100 computer called the XO. It was developed by the One Laptop Per Child project. The computer combines innovative hardware and software technologies that make it suitable for distribution in technology under resourced areas of the world. These same technologies are textbook examples of how we might make computing more sustainable and community friendly.

Take a look. Whether or not this computer is right for you, its a great example of facilitating global learning and communication so as to create a better world.

You can read a review of the XO by David Pogue in the New York Times.

Cheers, Bill

William Lynn :: Oct.06.2007 :: Ethics, Politics :: 1 Comment »

Last week, a fascinating article in the Washington Post caught my eye. The story involves a plan by the Indian government, called the Sethu Samudram project, to construct a sea channel through the Palk straight, located between India and Sri Lanka. The channel, which the government claims would provide a much needed boost to the national economy, would open a direct route for commercial and naval ships between the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal.

An enormous controversy surrounds the project. The reason? Opening the channel involves demolishing a shoal formation known by Hindus as Ram Sethu (Rama’s Bridge), or Adam’s Bridge. But these aren’t just any ol’ shoals. For Hindus, the shoals are sacred, the ancient remains of a bridge built for Lord Rama.

The debate over destruction of Ram Sethu involves a nexus of scientific, religious, political, economic, ecological, and ethical issues. Given the complexity of this matter, it will take a bit of digging to fully appreciate how all these interests interconnect. As I piece this together, I’ll share my findings with you. In the meantime, take a peek at the Save Ram Sethu Campaign. Their website provides some useful background information about the debate, particularly from a religious perspective.

Karin Lauria :: Oct.01.2007 :: Environmental Studies, Ethics, Human-Animal Studies, Religion :: No Comments »