Risking death, I have a different view. Philosophically it begins with the idea that with a push of a button man can destroy the world. We are the only creature with that power of dominance. We are also the only creature that comprehends global environmental issues; we are self aware, therefore we have some understandings of our impacts on nature. We also carry a guilt complex--with varying degrees validity. We are aware that we have conquested the world, and have taken on such horrid power that we in fact can destroy it. Therefore, we cannot escape our stewardship of the world. Stewardship demands active management: Because to be purely passive, let be and let be, will mean we will mindlessly go on to reduce this gaia into a cinder. That is what the human animal will do. However, despite protestations to the opposite, man is more than an animal; our self-awareness is unique if only because of its comprehensiveness--even given that perhaps some animals share self-awareness with us.
We are aware that we are self aware. Why does this matter? Responsibility. Either we have upset the balance of nature, or we are part of it. If we fail to appreciate the concept of stewardship, then as a mindless beast we shall destroy all life around us. An old indian chief sat by my fire and told of times when as young braves they would hunt all winter and not cross a moose track. A wolf explosion that happened in their grandfather's time had created a vast area of extinction. It took a hundred years for peripheral animal life to fill in the void. The moose was actually extinct from central BC until the white man opened it up. Tribes there have no indigenous word for them. So one needs consider extinctions. The fact is, we would rather not have them. The agonizing agony is, that instead of being active stewards, we think we are being environmentally friendly by abdicating our necessary place in the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment