Blog #11

    What religion were you raised with and how does that affect your view of spiritual ecology? What are your opinions on the Gaia Hypothesis? Do you agree or disagree? Do you believe we live in a hyper-masculine culture? If so, how do you see it changing?

            I was raised of a Catholic faith and I don’t think is significantly affected my view of spiritual ecology. In my own church, the ideals of spiritual ecology were not preached; however, it may just be that I was not informed or aware of this type of thought as I am now and did not interpret the priests’ message as it was intended to be at the time. In the reading on Pope Benedict’s focus for the celebration of the World Day of Peace I was pleased that it was on protecting creation, “mother earth”, following suit Pope John Paul II from 20 years before. Although, while I may not have been directly instructed on spiritual ecology in my religion, the overall beliefs and attitude I derived regarding my own behavior definitely have been applied to my position pertaining to the environment around me.

              I do find the Gaia Hypothesis to be a very probable one. It seems almost logical that the life of a system should determine the composition of the system and not the other way around. It is a difficult proposition to support, because you would keep coming back to “which came first, the chicken, or the egg?” It’s possible the a life form came to be that sustained itself on certain bodily processes that would affect the surrounding atmosphere; however, there is the uncertainty of how it could come to be without that property there to allow that bodily function to start.
            Regarding a hyper-masculine society, I do see some inequality, but not one that defines our culture in such a way. I think women want to see more feminine involvement in, so far, male dominated activity. However, I feel that men and women are equally skilled at different things and until each person can see the value in their own and each other’s skill as being equal people will believe society is hyper-masculine.

Blog #10

What is Social Ecology? What are your reactions to the readings? What forms of hierarchy are in our world today? Are these hierarchies natural? Are there any better alternatives?

             Through what I have gained from the text, social ecology is the understanding and recognition that environmental problems arise from social issues. Some people find this a degrading perspective on the environment, believing there are more pressing reasons to protect our resources and Earth; however, social opportunities are the main interaction and communication between people to share opinions, ideas, beliefs, regulations, ect. Social ecology attributes this communication and its ineffectiveness to the creation of a class hierarchy within nations and across the globe. Developed nation vs developing nation struck me as the most prominent hierarchy that currently exists in the world and that is having the most profound impact on the environment.
            These hierarchies are not natural in the evolutionary standpoint of natural selection, genetics, ancestry or mutations that can allow a species or individual to have more success, reproductive or otherwise, and dominate another. However, in a system founded on economic principles, as ours is, it is natural. While I do believe that every person should be on an even playing field, I feel that this understanding can be held by every individual on a personal level and simply not be measured by wealth or status. Every role is important, but unfortunately every role will not reap the same rewards. It only takes the satisfaction of the individual with their own life, belongings, ect. to see that the hierarchy isn’t as defined. The hierarchy doesn’t have to be destroyed, just its perception.

Blog #9

Explain your view on deep ecology. How can you relate these views to your lifestyle or society? Which principle do you agree most with and which do you agree least with? Why? What concerns do you have about Deep Ecology?

According the readings I agree with Arne Naess and the definition of his term “deep ecology” in the sense that humans should become more receptive to the world around them and ask deeper questions. Those deeper questions should be framed in such a way that we learn why and how, not just what. I also agree with the notion that humans are not isolated or any more important than the rest of nature.

            In Owen’s “The Science of Ecology” he stresses a way of thinking that makes arriving at the most efficient solution to solving the world’s current environmental problems that I feel expands upon Arne Naess’s idea that humans are not separate from nature. This is a familiar sentiment in most green thinking. Why then, should man-made objects such as construction be seen any different? We construct buildings to live in just as animals create their habitat out of the environment. This way of thinking will not promote destruction of the environment, but encourage a mindset that considers all projects in a more direct relationship to its surroundings. I feel that this shows there can be a balance between technology and ecological movements. The two do not have to be exclusive and this fits with my belief and lifestyle very well. However, I did sense from some of the reading that while in theory, this can be a relatively harmless practice, in actuality, those instituting the actions of deep ecology have much more extreme uses in mind.

Blog #8

What are the preconditions necessary for using consensus decision making in a group or organization? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the process?

            From the readings I inferred that for consensus decision making to occur there must be unanimity and participation. If everyone can’t come to a final solution, then the group doesn’t move forward. When a member is not comfortable letting the group progress it is the responsibility of the consenting members to bring them to a middle ground. It is not wrong for a member to still question the motives of the group as a whole. If they were not made comfortable the decision would no longer be unanimous. It struck me, what Carolina Estes said comparing democracy and consensus decision making; “yes you can come to a decision, and the majority has clearly carried, but it’s their decision, it’s not our decision.” In a consensus you can come to terms with the final answer. It may not have been your ideal answer, but you are willing to support what has been created through incorporating every member’s values.

            Participation is another precondition for consensus decision making. If you miss a gathering to cover an issue that a decision must be made upon, your input is not accounted for. In this way consensus decision making is similar to democracy. It is hard enough coming to an agreement with every member that does attend. Even when you are in attendance it is important to participate actively. Consensus decision making supports the group, but only if the group supports it.

            Consensus decision making can be slow and may not always arrive at the best most efficient solution due to compromises. While it is true people rarely slow down the group by refusing to compromise, it is just as likely people will try to not be a hindrance by not voicing their opinion at all; therefore, defeating the purpose of consensus decision making. However, it is truly a decision of the people, made by each active member.

Blog #7

What is culture-jamming? What are its forms? What do you think if it as a tool for activism? Be sure to use specific examples for the readings and the Adbusters website. Find an example of Youtube.

             Culture-jamming was derived from the term “jamming,” which originally referred to the interruption of radio broadcasts or other people with commentary of typically inappropriate content. Culture-jamming was adapted from this definition by promoting advertisements that deviated from the norm of commercial communication. Often they are similar to public service announcements in message, but in their content and substance they begin to stray. The means through with they convey their message normally utilizes a shock component.

            The forum culture-jamming is presented in certainly enables it to capture a lot of attention from media-concise people on the internet and watching television. For example, Peretti’s direction of attention towards Nike sweatshop child labor spread rapidly online through a production request. This method of activism against cruelty to others and manipulation of the consumer would be very successful; however, the approach taken by the “Joe Chemo” subvertisement would turn people away due to it attacking consumer habits personally. While one places the blame on the producer, blaming the consumer may cause them to make excuses for their behavior and not feel guilt regarding it.
            Here is an example of culture jamming. This is an anti-ad by Adbusters similar to one described in our readings. It is an ad for a Buy Nothing Day more recent then the one mentioned. It utilizes familiar sites when shopping to send a new message about the victimization of consumers.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQmdBiD0m2g

Blog #6

What are you reactions to your GTP reading? What are your preliminary ideas for leading a class meeting focused on this topic?

             I never previously realized how many competing factors impede or hinder the success and effectiveness of environmental policy. First, is the debate over what level environmental policy should even be handled. Is it an issue for local, state or the national government? Second, the myriad of opportunities for environmental policy to be instituted create a conflict in itself. How can one determine which need of the environment is more crucial than another? Third, what economic, political and resource status is the nation currently functioning under? I had always assumed that environmental policy was delayed or overridden due to the obvious and inevitable argument regarding national priorities, but I never imagined so many fundamental issues were still not clear in such a prominent sector of the government.

            My initial thought after reading up on my Group Teaching Project topic Environmental Policy, is to cover the information in sections such as history, political influence, community impact, perceptions and current issues. Each subcategory can be illustrated by providing an applicable example that accurately portrays environmental policy’s functions. Once every facet of environmental policy has been covered and demonstrated through real life events, a hypothetical scenario can be presented to the class and they can utilize the information just covered to decide how the proposed situation should be resolved or even whether or not it should be.