sociology essay-1

User Generated

znttvrznttvr

Writing

Description

Use the files that I post, would be very helpful.

Use the following files to complete these questions. Each question requires 150 words. Total 750 words.

1. Explain Singer’s infant test and what it is supposed to demonstrate about our current moral attitude towards members of other species.

2. Explain what Thomas Norton-Smith means by a “person.”

3. Explain two of the six settler moves to innocence as described by Tuck and Yang.

4. Explain what Carol J. Adams means when she says that meat is a symbolic food.

5. Describe the “two views” of land provided by Bunge.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

What is environmental ethics?  “What  should we do about the environment” Not simply subject of scientific study  Anecdote (teacher from more ‘conservative’ university and state)  This course should call in to question the way you conceive of what it means to be an environmentalist and problematize the way in which the environment is a problem for you.  Famous American physician, lawyer, author, philanthropist, and conservationist  Very close with Teddy Roosevelt and Herbert Hoover  Helped create Glacier and Denali National Parks  Co-founded Save-The-Redwoods League in 1913 (still operates today)  Organizer for American Bison Society  Pioneered wildlife management     Hitler called it his “bible” Blond-hair, blue-eyed Nordic race Blamed lax immigration laws, interracial marriage, and social barriers to natural selection for the decline of the Nordic race Director of American Eugenics Society and Immigration Restriction League “Mistaken regard for what are believed to be divine laws and a sentimental belief in the sanctity of human life tend to prevent both elimination of defective infants and the sterilization of such adults as are themselves of no value to the community. The laws of nature require the obliteration of the unfit and human life is valuable only when it is of use to the community or race.” “To Americans I hardly need to say, ‘Westward the star of empire takes its way.’ The West of which I speak is but another name for the Wild; and what I have been preparing to say is, that in Wildness is the preservation of the world.” - HDT, Walking, 1862 (2 years before the Yosemite Grant) “From the forest and wilderness come the tonics and barks which brace mankind. Our ancestors were savages…The founders of every state which has risen to eminence have drawn their nourishment and vigor from a similar wild source… We require an infusion of hemlock-spruce or arbor-vitæ in our tea.” Happened upon by U.S. soldiers pursuing Ahwahneechee (Sierra Miwok) ahwani means “gaping mouth”  Described by Dr. Lafayette Bunnell in his book, The Discovery of Yosemite:  “Haze hung over the valley that day, light as gossamer, and clouds partially dimmed the higher cliffs and mountains. As I looked, a peculiar exalted sensation seemed to fill my whole being, and I found my eyes in tears with emotion. I had seen the power and glory of a supreme being and the majesty of his handiwork.” Dr. Lafayette on American Indians: “peculiar living ethnological curiosities,” “screaming demons,” “overgrown vicious children”  Aristotle   Human as rational/social/language-using animal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NtegAOQpSs  Descartes Material world/Rational World  Thinking being/Besouled being vs  Purely material/mechanical beings   Kant    Nature vs Humans/Freedom Human is End-in-Itself No direct duties to animals What parts of the environment get ethical consideration on this world view? According to Aristotle, Descartes, and Kant, only “Humans”… (all humans?) What parts of the environment get ethical consideration on this world view? According to Aristotle, Descartes, and Kant, only “Humans”… (all humans?) Moral Community….  Comparison to other liberation movements of the past  Liberation movement needs two things:   Expansion of moral horizons Extension or reinterpretation of the basic moral principle of equality “Practices that were previously regarded as natural and inevitable come to be seen as the result of an unjustifiable prejudice.” p. 73  It is difficult to see bias if it benefits you “We need to consider them [fundamental attitudes] from the point of view of those most disadvantaged by our attitudes, and the practices that follow from these attitudes….that consistently operate to benefit one group – usually the one to which we ourselves belong – at the expense of another.” p. 73 “My aim is to advocate that we make this mental switch in respect of our attitudes and practices towards a very large group of beings: members of species other than our own” …by extending the principle of equality  Extending principle of equality does not mean extending equal treatment – it means extending equal consideration.  Singer argues that the principle of equality to be extended is equal consideration, not equal treatment. What does it mean to say that “all humans are equal”? “We should make it quite clear that the claim to equality does not depend on intelligence, moral capacity, physical strength, or similar matters of fact [factual equality]. Equality is a moral idea, not a simple assertion of fact. There is no logically compelling reason for assuming that a factual difference in ability between two people justifies any difference in the amount of consideration we give to satisfying their needs and interests. The principle of the equality of human beings is not a description of an alleged actual equality among humans: it is a prescription of how we should treat humans.” p. 76 “If possessing a higher degree of intelligence does not entitle one human to use another for his own ends, how can it entitle humans to exploit nonhumans?” p. 76 The only non-arbitrary criterion for moral consideration is sentience – “Can they suffer”? A stone does not have sentience, therefore it should get no moral consideration. A mouse does have sentience, therefore it should get moral consideration. “….sentience (the capacity to suffer or experience enjoyment or happiness) is the only defensible boundary of concern…To mark this boundary by some characteristic like intelligence or rationality would be to mark it in an arbitrary way.” p. 77 Why be vegetarian?  Eating meat is purely a matter of taste  Eating meat embodies a somewhat insignificant benefit for humans, while it is a matter of life and death for non-human animals  Therefore eating meat is morally indefensible. “Animals are treated like machines that convert fodder into flesh.” p. 77 The consistency challenge (infant test): “Would the experimenter be prepared to perform his experiment on an orphaned human infant, if that were the only way to save many lives?” p. 78 (or a human with severe and irreversible brain damage) If not….the experimenter shows bias in favor of his own species without any justification….this is speciesism Any argument claiming that all and only humans deserve equal consideration merely in virtue of their being human commits this error. “Philosophers who set out to find a characteristic that will distinguish humans form other animals rarely take the course of abandoning [infants and the severely disabled] by lumping them in with the other animals. It is easy to see why they do not. To take this line without re-thinking our attitudes to other animals would entail that we have the right to perform painful experiments on retarded humans for trivial reasons; similarly it would follow that we had the right to rear and kill these humans for food.” p. 80 Without any good arguments to fall back on…it becomes clear that “most of us are speciesists” Unser Täglich Brot (Our Daily Bread) 2005 by Nikolaus Geyrhalter “Animals are treated like machines that convert fodder into flesh” (Singer). By Carol J. Adams  Connections between violence towards women and violence towards animals  The “sexual politics of meat” is “an attitude and action that animalizes women and sexualizes and feminizes animals.” (p. 4) Meat is a symbolic food (p. 56) of cultural significance. In general it tends to be associated with male dominance (patriarchy).  Cultural assumption that real men “need meat, have a right to meat, and that meat eating is a male activity associated with virility.” (p. 4)  Meat eating and domination as central to “masculine” subject formation  Dietary habits divide people hierarchically by class and power as well as gender (think aristocracy vs laborer, rich countries vs poor countries, those with nutrition assistance, etc.)  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2 015/04/03/missouri-republicans-are-trying-to-banfood-stamp-recipients-from-buying-steak-and-seafood/  Women and children often go hungry while men are fed the most nutritionally dense foods (even when women’s protein requirement are higher)  In times of abundance, the diets of upper class men/women typically more similar  Race and meat – George M. Beard  Meat, especially beef as superior food (higher on evolutionary chain), to be eaten by those who are “most evolved”  Meat is king – all other foods are “side dishes”  Vegetables a symbol of passivity  Refusal to “eat meat” seen as threat to patriarchy Burger King: “I am man, hear me roar”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGLHlvb8skQ Carl’s Jr.: Charlotte Mckinney https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WTA_8waxTo Hummer: Restore your manhood https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL4ZkYPLN38  Member of Piqua Sept Shawnee Tribe (Part of Shawnee Tribe)  M.S. in Mathematics from Pittsburg State U  PhD in Philosophy from Universityof Illinois  Focus in logic  Why a “dance” rather than a “network” or an “interaction”?  The popular Western tradition tends to identify the concepts of “human” and “person” – they are coextensive categories, or, being human is a necessary and sufficient condition for being a person  Ross Poole Finds in Locke, Kant, Hobbes that the category of human is not coextensive with the category of person – rather, there are relevant criteria for personhood  Norton-Smith, describing an American Indian view      Pulls apart concepts of Human and Person (one must “become a person”) Argues that personhood is constituted by participation in a network of social and moral relationships with other persons Argues that this interaction is moral in nature Argues that other-than-human are persons even under a “more robust” conception of personhood Argues that this does not diminish the status of humans as “mere brutes” (Descartes) but enhances the status of other entities (p. 78) There is a metaphysical notion of personhood and a moral notion of personhood Metaphysical Personhood: possess rationality, selfreflection, etc Moral Personhood: the capacity to take blame/credit for actions, the ability to make decisions based on notions of good/bad (moral agency) It follows on this view: Not all human beings are persons, it is possible that some non-humans are persons Native idea of what makes a human a person – its life as an “animate being” (p. 82) What is an animate being? Story of Coyote, Iktome, and Iya  Trickster character  What does the story say about animate beings?  Animate    beings…. Have their own “life force” or manitou (p. 88) Change outward form Are not simply “everything existing” “spirit-persons” are “spirit beings” just like people Western Categories not applicable: Supernatural vs Natural:  pure spirit/infallible/beyond matter/different realm vs  inanimate material world governed by physical laws Animate being as spirit being “It usually is at this juncture that the skeptical Western scientific and philosophical minds guffaw, then disengage, because the claim has nothing but the air of the supernatural …. One cannot perceive a spirit, so the predicate “spirit” is as empty as other empty predicates – “angel,” “devil,” etc…” (p. 86) Spirit as Manitou (force, power, capability) “Spirit” similar to Western Category of “mind” Animate ≠ Alive “In American Indian traditions an animate being is a person by virtue of its membership and participation in an actual network of social and moral relationships and practices with other persons, so moral agency is at the core of a Native conception of persons, just as….the Western conception of personhood” (p. 90). Moral agency entails: Special responsibilities Familial kinship “Human persons participate in a familial social group with other human persons, with powerful spirit persons – Our Grandmother, the Thunderbirds, and Cyclone Person among them – also with their plant and animal siblings and it is participation in this actual concrete nexus of moral relationships and obligations that constitutes their personhood” (p. 91). Principle of Equality  No hierarchy – lower/higher, simple/complex   No “most evolved” / “highly evolved” (Eastman, reader p. 143)  Only differences Conclusions….  Personhood is not what is essential to being human  Humans are “spirit beings” who just happen to have human form  Human beings must “become persons”  This process has a moral component  The conception of spirit being is expansive rather than exclusive “Native conception of persons is expansive, for all sorts of nonhuman spirit beings – ancestors and animals, plants and places, physical forces and cardinal directions, the Sun, Earth, and other powerful spirit beings  Compare Singer’s view of sentience with NortonSmith’s idea of an animate being. Is one view more intuitive to you than another? Do you find value in both views? Author A Sand County Almanac (published 1949) 2 million copies sold (The Giver = 10 million) Naturalist Forester (Yale School of Forestry) Moral Community… “..he hanged all on one rope a dozen slavegirls of his household whom he suspected of misbehavior during his absence. This hanging involved no question of propriety. The girls were property. The disposal of property was then, as now, a matter of expediency, not of right and wrong.” p. 163 Ethical criteria extended to new fields of conduct. Not merely “opinion” or moral constructs of philosophers but… “a process of ecological evolution…an ethic, ecologically, is a limitation on freedom of action in the struggle for existence.” “There is as yet no ethic dealing with man’s relation to land and to the animals and plants which grow upon it. Land, like Odysseus’ slave-girls, is still property. The land-relation is still strictly economic, entailing privileges but not obligations.” p. 164 The extension of ethics to the land is “an evolutionary possibility and an ecological necessity.” “The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land.” p. 164 “not merely soil; it is a fountain of energy flowing through a circuit of soils, plants, and animals” p. 168 Humans are a “plain member and citizen” of the land. History is not merely a human affair – Just as influenced by, for example, plant succession. The Ecological Conscience “Conservation is a state of harmony between men and land.” Not just tweaking our current practices a bit….requires radical change… “In our attempt to make conservation easy, we have made it trivial.” p. 166 Conservation….  Not enlightened economic self-interest  Not merely practicing conservation that is profitable  Not without sacrifice. What are the problems with economic motives for conservation? What are the problems with economic motives for conservation? - - Ignores parts of the land that have no commercial value Only attends to parts of nature profitable to humans (green economy model) “To sum up: a system of conservation based solely on economic self-interest is hopelessly lopsided. It tends to ignore, and thus eventually eliminate, many elements in the land community that lack commercial value, but that are essential to its healthy functioning.” p. 168 The Land Pyramid The land “as a biotic mechanism”…? “We can be ethical only in relation to something we can see, feel, understand, love, or otherwise have faith in.” Not “balance of nature” …biotic pyramid “Food chains conduct energy upwards…” Key to conservation is understanding of “energy circuits” “The process of altering the pyramid for human occupation releases stored energy, and this often gives rise, during the pioneering period, a deceptive exuberance of plant and animal life, both wild and tame. These releases of biotic capital tend to becloud or postpone the penalties of violence.” . 169 Side note on organic farming… “The discontent that labels itself ‘organic farming,’ while bearing some of the earmarks of a cult, is nevertheless biotic in its direction, particularly in its insistence on the importance of soil flora and fauna.” p. 171 – mimic natural systems, energy flows, produces or sustains biotic capital?? A-B cleavage of conservation ideology… A - Commodity Production - Wildlife for meat, sport - Artificial propagation - Crops by tonnage - Improvements in technological extraction (improvements in the pump) B - Land as biota (not commodity) - Concern for noneconomic issues - Crops by quality - Improvements in biological base (not methods of extraction) “Your true modern is separated from the land by many middlemen, and by innumerable physical gadgets. He has no vital relation to it; to him it is the space between cities on which crops grow. Turn him loose for a day on the land, and if the spot does not happen to be a golf links or a “scenic” area, he is bored stiff….in short, land is something he has ‘outgrown’.” p. 172 Is this our current state in Eugene? Central principle of the land ethic: “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.” Do you think this mean that the sole principle of ethics ought to be the good of the whole biotic community (i.e. holism)? What about individual animals, people, etc? Harvard Educated Environmental Philosopher Humane Utilitarianism vs Environmental Ethics vs Central principle of AL:  Relieve animal suffering Central principle of Environmentalism:  Maintain integrity, stability, etc. of ecosystems “To speak of the rights of animals, of treating them as equals, of liberating them, and at the same time to let nearly all of them perish unnecessarily in the most brutal and horrible ways is not to display humanity but hypocrisy in the extreme” (41) What should animal liberationists do about animal suffering in the natural world? “Environmentalists cannot be animal liberationists. Animal liberationists cannot be environmentalists” p. 42 What are the tensions between animal liberation and environmentalism? Do you agree that they cannot be reconciled? University of South Dakota, 1979 Korean War veteran PhD in Philosophy from De Paul University, Chicago Main claim: The human relationship to land is constituted by a feeling. To the white man, land is… To the American Indian, land is… • Ground • Thing (Basis of all wealth) • “Primordial flooring” • Fungible • • • • • Earth Mother of all that lives Ur-source of life itself A living, breathing person Source of all flesh Both groups claim to “love” of the land… …but they mean different things… White love of the land = “working the land,” plowing, digging, mining, blasting, etc… …criticize American Indians for “wasting it” by not working it (wasteland) This notion of love is “the foundation of their attitudes toward life in general and toward each other in particular.” p. 3 I-it relationship (vs We-Thou) Love = exploitation/manipulation Roots of different views of origins of the mythologies of each group… White European… Economic: Land has “yield” Political: Wasted if in “state of nature” Biblical: “Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over…every living thing that moveth on the earth” “men to till the ground…” Philosophical These mythologies as a whole constitute a general feeling towards the land. Imaginative comprehensive view Vs Mechanistic scientific view (p. 5) Lakota (for example) feelings towards the earth entail a kinship with all creatures of the earth, sky and water…this “was a real and active principle.” (p. 6) How does this compare with Leopold’s land ethic and his view that we should ‘love’ the land? Does Leopold’s land ethic still see the land as an object or mechanism, even if a great one? For This Land: Writings on Religion in America (1999) “Since time immemorial, Indian tribal Holy Men have gone into the high places, lakes, and isolated sanctuaries to pray, receive guidance from the Spirits, and train younger people in ceremonies that constitute the spiritual life of the tribal community. In these ceremonies, medicine men represented the whole web of cosmic life in the continuing search for balance and harmony, and through various rituals in which birds, animals, and plants were participants, harmony of life was achieved and maintained.” p. 203 Forced relocations and legal restrictions made many ceremonies impossible or difficult. Sacred sites must remain isolated. Many on National Forest land are not protected from logging and tourism. Supreme Court analyzing tribal religions with same criteria as Western religions… “ceremonies and rituals performed for some thousands of years were treated as if they were personal fads or matters of modern emotional, personal preference...” (p. 205) Holding land to be sacred is not a mere belief but a way of experiencing the world – an “active principle.” (p. 206) Four types of sacred lands, bound together by the principle of respect for the sacred… First:  Most familiar type  “attribute a sacredness because the location is a site where within our own history, regardless of group, something of great importance took place” p. 207  Often related to violence  Every society needs/has these – they are a way to honor the past (memorials, etc.) Second:  More profound  Made sacred not by the action of humans but simply “appears” from outside  Ex: site where buffalo emerge in spring in Black Hills, South Dakota  Involve “all our relations” Third: Places where a power has revealed itself to humans  These places are universal/all-inclusive – sacred in and of themselves (not in relation to a particular group of humans)  Sometimes they are violated … “The cumulative effect of continuous secularity, however, poses an entirely different kind of danger and prophecies tell us of the impious people who would come here, defy the Creator, and bring about the massive destruction of the planet.” (p. 210)  Fourth:  New sites due to new revelations  (vs Federal courts that restrict sacred sites to those that have been traditionally visited….hence, “God is dead”) “As human beings we live in time and space and receive most of our signals about proper behavior primarily from each other. Under these circumstances, both the individual and group must have some kind of sanctity if we are to have a social order at all. By recognizing the sacredness of lands in the many aspects we have described, we place ourselves in a realistic context in which the individual and the group can cultivate and enhance the experience of the sacred.” (p. 212) Celilo Falls – oldest continuous native settlement in North America – Hub of cultural activity (25k years?) Submerged by Dalles Dam in 1957 for hydroelectricity “No real progress can be made in environmental law unless some of the insights into the sacredness of land derived from traditional tribal religions become basic attitudes of the larger society.” (p. 213) Do you agree that “sanctity” or “sacredness” as a basic attitude or part of experience is necessary for harmony between humans and the non-human environment? “Non-Indian interest seems to focus on the sacredness of land and the perception that Indians understand land much more profoundly than other peoples, and to the possibility of adopting or transferring that kind of relationship to the larger social whole. I believe there is some truth in this perception. However, I also believe that this assertion is being made by people who do not really think deeply about what land and sacred ness are, and by people who would be content to receive the simple poetic admonitions and aphorisms that pass as knowledge in the American intellectual cafeteria.” (p. 250) “The sacredness of land is first and foremost an emotional experience.” (p. 251) Reflective emotions:      Vast majority of experiences regarding the land Experience the uniqueness of places “Meditate on who we are, what our society is, where we came from, where we are going, what it all means” Lands “call forth” these questions Sense of being within something larger and more powerful than ourselves Revelatory emotions:   Contain directions through which a new future is possible Might radically change “every measure” used to gauge normal life Difficulty for non-natives to experience sacredness       Lack historical perspective/stories Absence of lasting communities Travel freely – do not accept responsibility for locations of residence Land is not personalized “Christians…restrict holiness to the human species. Indians understand that there is holiness in everything, and that human beings are simply a part of the larger whole” (p. 256) “Civil society” relies too much on the human-made environment Our “electronic/electric, mechanical world” (p. 257) vs Humans as possessing a “special ability to communicate with other forms of life, learn from them all, and act as a focal point for things they wish to express.” p. 258  Sacred has an objective dimension.  (vs New Agers)  Must experience being “part and parcel of it physically” (p. 253) “The Indian relationship with the land…cannot be brought about by energetic action or sincerity alone. Nor can mere continued occupation create an attitude of respect, since the basic premise – that the universe and each thing in it is alive and has personality – is an attitude of experience and not an intellectual presupposition…Yet we see in the present best efforts of groups on non-Indians an honest desire to become truly indigenous in the sense of living properly with the land. Thus we cannot help but applaud the interest non-Indians are now demonstrating in the areas of conservation and ecological restoration. The future looks far more hopeful than previously.” (p. 260) What do you think Deloria means by “becoming indigenous”? What should it entail? What should it not entail? What are some potential pitfalls in this process for non-indigenous groups? Eve Tuck and Wayne Yang (2012) UC San Diego State Univ of NY What is external colonialism? What is internal colonialism? What is settler colonialism? How is the project of decolonization different from other civil and human rights based social justice initiatives? How is the idea of decolonization invaded by metaphor?  Decolonize student thinking  Decolonize our knowledge  Decolonize our schools  Decolonize our methods What is unsettling about decolonization….especially the decolonization of settler colonialism? Land… Settler ideology – the settler sees himself as…  Holding dominion over the earth  More deserving than other groups and species  Entitled to make a “new home” Why aren’t settlers immigrants? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmDihp8yBp0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wejt939QXko Playing Indian: “Settler moves to innocence” – “settler fantasies of easier paths to reconciliation” Settler nativism i. i. Grandmother complex; one drop rule Fantasizing adoption ii. i. ii. iii. i. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDkqIrb5i1c Becoming without becoming Colonial equivocation “the homogenizing of various experiences of oppression as colonization” iv. iv. Conscientization critical consciousness vs returning stolen land At risk-ing/Asterisk-ing Indigenous peoples v. iv. vi. iv. Indigenous peoples as subjects of social and medical research Re-occupation and urban homesteading Occupy “Solidarity” in the settler-colonial relation  Incomensurable interests rather than common interest “The answers will not emerge from friendly understanding, and indeed require a dangerous understanding of uncommonality that un-coalesces coalition politics – moves that may feel very unfriendly… To fully enact an ethic of incommensurability means relinquishing settler futurity, abandoning the hope that settlers may one day be commensurable to Native peoples.”
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Outline
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References


Course Title
Student Name
Institution Affiliation

QUESTION 1
In 1993, Peter Singer suggested that new born infants should only be considered as human beings
for the first 30 days after they are born. He also suggested that any baby born with physical
disabilities should be killed on the spot by the healthcare physicians. Babies don’t have any idea
about whether they exist or not, therefore, they do not qualify as complete human beings and their
lives should have less value than the lives of dogs or pigs. According to Singer’s notion, people
should have a better moral attitude towards animals or creatures of different species and show
them the emotional love that we show newborn babies. If Singer’s claim that the lives of newborn
infants are of less value compared to the lives of animals, then we need to be even more
emotionally attached to animals that we are to babies; or at least afford them the same love we...


Anonymous
Really helpful material, saved me a great deal of time.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags