儒学                             道学                                墨学

自然观  人与自然同源               人与自然一体                     人与自然并存

道德阶梯    存在                            不存在                              存在

对自然的态度 道义上的爱护            无为                                非攻

保护方式 守时守律，仁爱万物    道法自然，返朴归真           适度、节用

伦理观归类    人类中心论               生态中心论                    人类中心论

 

儒家： “仁”是儒家伦理道德的核心，“与天地和其德”是儒家对待自然的态度，即以道义为基础的人类中心论，这与西方的人类中心论是有本质区别的。“使万物各得其和以生，各得其养以成”。

在老子哲学中，“道”是天地万物的根源和基础，宇宙间的一切自然之物，都是以“道”为其最大的共性和最初的本原的有机统一的整体，同时，人也是天地万物的一部分。“人法地，地法天，天法道，道法自然。”人由天地而生，天地由道而生，道并非由谁而生，道本身是自然而然的。——天人合一、“抱朴守真”、“回归自然”

Part 2. History

1.      Environmental Movement Spurs Legislation, 1960-1996, Source Database: DISCovering World History.
Affording facts that what government did in response of environment movements, the defect and controversial parts. Also provide lots of further reading and at the top list the principal personages, which is really helpful.

Also, we can see in this text that environment legislation events were much better developed in1970s than 1990s. This may have two possible reasons. One is that environment law is more consummate now so that they do not need to develop more. Another is as the atmosphere and situation have changed now, people do not care so much about environmental events.

2.      Encyclopedia of World Biography: Gifford Pinchot, John Muir, Aldo Leopold, Rachel Carson

Actually not very useful, for it’s short and focusing on personal events of them. But

3.      Kim Stanley Robinson's "Mars" Trilogy and the Leopoldian Land Ethic, Utopian Studies 14 no2 118-35 2003

Introduction of the land ethic raised by Leopold.  

 

In my case there are three stages of researching.

At first, I knew nothing of this field. Everything is new and interesting to me that I just became voracious and omnivorous. But soon after I feel tired of them. Every time I turned on my computer intending to read them ended up in a state that I just left the window open and turned to another thing. It just feels like losing all the energy. However I had to move on. In the process, I found myself got used to them. Though no exciting like the very beginning, they just seem to be my old acquaintance that can be treated calmly and habitually. Also when I think of sth, the relevant resources will come to my mind and I can refer to.

    I believe there is a fourth stage in which I can feel conversant about them, and when I think of it, not the articles but the thoughts come to my mind.

2.body

2.1.      Genesis

In my point of view, two roads diverged in the beginning of 20th century, when Gifford Pinchot and John Muir led a public debate that “what is The value of a tree?”

Muir was an environmentalist who saw the wilderness as a refuge against the ills of modern society, “certain natural areas were sacred places where human beings could encounter the holy.” while Pinchot regarded conservation as a means to retain the economic value of natural resources. Muir helped establish a system of national parks, while Pinchot's policies helped private interests to log public lands.

We can see in this debate the two different spirits long with American history. At the very beginning of the United States, to end the chaotic situation of the country, Jefferson & Hanmilton developed respectively idealism & pragmatism ways. These two kinds of ideology thus became the mainstream and appeared in every aspect in American society.

Quote: Let everyone read [Sargent's] book, travel, and see [the redwoods] for himself, and while fire and the axe still threaten destruction, make haste to come to the help of these trees, our country's pride and glory.(1)

John Muir, 1903

It is almost impossible to bring home to the average man the economic importance of this great national resource. But without cheap lumber our industrial development would have been seriously retarded.(2)

Gifford Pinchot, 1901

(1) John Muir, "Sargent's Silva," Atlantic Monthly 92 (July 1903): 147.

(2) Gifford Pinchot, "Trees and Civilization" World's Work 2 (July 1901): 986.

We can see several differences laid between these.

 

2.2     stand point

Pragmatism: make use of human’s fear of death and risk that cannot persist developing, or we can say based on economic and medical needs.

For fear of death, we can take Rachel Carson and her famous book, Silent Spring, for instance. In her book, she warned us how unlimited, reckless reliance on pesticides and herbicides is ruining the earth by poisoning the soil and waters, and therefore cause fatal disease such as cancer. Though she is the supporter of Muir, her book acted in a pragmatic way in fact. No book in environment field before had reached the large effect as it did. Why? Simply because people don’t want to die.

For economy, we still can look at Gifford Pinchot. Gifford Pinchot embodied the conservation philosophy of Roosevelt Progressivism, tirelessly promoting the efficient management of natural resources by trained professionals for the long-term economic benefit of society. In another words, it doesn’t matter as long as the nature resources can afford people’s development.

Idealism: human’s desire of equality and humanity towards externals.

Muir, the archetypal preservationist, found intrinsic value in nature. He sought the protection of the wilderness and resources not to serve economic ends but as a buttress against the pathologies--material and psychological--of modern society.(3) In his eyes nature is more likely to be revered rather than used. In other words, nature is higher than human beings.

When it come to Leopold, the composer of the sand county almanac, who invented the theory of "The Land Ethic," that the concept of ethical responsibilities toward the land, and the establishment of ecological restoration both for environmental learning and for land management, nature became our responsibility, in another words, be brought into our “sympathy community”.(for this “sympathy community”, means things that our human being really care about. For example, in the past man never cares about slaves. No one could be blamed killing or afflicting slaves, because at that time slaves were not in our “sympathy community”.)

 In spite of minor differences, these two kinds of view both tent to arouse affection towards nature, which means to preserve regardless of our profit or even though our sacrifice. This is much different from the former one.

(3) Roderick Nash in Wilderness and the American Mind (New Haven, 1973), 161-81; Elmo R. Richardson, The Politics of Conservation: Crusades and Controversies, 1897-1913 (Berkeley, 1962), 44-46 and passim; Donald Worster, Nature's Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas (San Francisco, 1977; reprint, New York, 1985); see also Samuel E Hays, Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: The Progressive Conservation Movement, 1890-1920 (Cambridge, 1959), 141-46, 189-98.

 

2.3      Connection between human and nature (this part is very similar to part 2, so I’m thinking merge them together.)

Pragmatism: human being is the conductor and dominator, in other words, anthropocentrism.

This is largely from the Holy Bible where god gave human the power to supervise all creatures on earth. Nature resources are things for us to use. What we need is to use wisely. No matter how splendid they said, they cannot hide this attribute. For the pesticide issue, people only cared about the pesticide’s toxicity. If it wouldn’t harm people’s heath, it doesn’t matter how harsh it damage the ecosystem.

Idealism: consider nature independent and integrative. These kinds of thinkers placed nature prior or at least equal to us.

 

4.      Methods to make progress and affect to environment process

Pragmatism: till now most like raising a parade, cooperate with government and so on.

We can see easily that pragmatists are more likely to cooperate with government. Pinchot himself is a governor. The more typical example is Albert Gore, the former vice-president who wrote the book Earth In The Balance. They tent to act towards a specific infraction and propose their solution or just their protests, like dam construction issues, the pesticide issue and so on.

But as the start point is human being, when they become politician, they lost the stand point to criticize government, therefore lost the initial purpose. (4)

Pragmatism lead to the boom of 1960s to 1970s, gaining better results than idealism in past. Like Rachel Carson’s silent spring: More than a billion dollars worth of chemical sprays was being sold and used in America each year. It was not long after its introduction in 1962 that the public-at-large began to complain to their legislators that not enough safeguards against pesticide poisoning were in effect. Lawmakers, both local and national, began to create the sort of legislation that would end pesticide abuse. DDT was taken off the market under a newly passed federal law, and limits on the use of other chemicals were put into effect. More importantly, perhaps, the public's attitude toward chemical spraying underwent a profound change--a change that time has shown to be irreversible. Gore wrote in the preface of silent spring that the found of Environmental Protection Agency largely depended on the consciousness and care aroused by Carson….

But it always cannot avoid the conflict with people’s desire of better life – on an extent means more consume which will certainly lead to environment problem. Also, when the lack of nature resources is released, people tent to ignore the consequence, like the resource of oil. In 1970s, when the "oil crisis("石油危机)took place, many people thought a lot of resource preservation. (4) But after the war in Iraq, Americans seem to not lack oil any more. Apparently less attention is placed on preservation now.

(Statistic evidence on resource consuming)

(4) 美国学者谢菲尔谈西方生态运动陷入困境的原因  王谨编写

Idealism: also parade, but mostly research in theory, forge associations.

Idealism was not as glorious as pragmatism in the past. People all knows silent spring, but few heard of Aldo Leopold’s the sand county almanac. Ironically, it was considered the Bible of ecologist after the success of silent spring. (5)

(5) 20世纪90年代的美国环境保护运动和环境保护主义侯文蕙

But this is not main problem. Idealism has very complicated aspects and connection with other issues like feminist, racism etc, because of the desire of equality and humanity. This is the two-blade sword. The approach of equality certainly can bring a satisfied result of our environment issues. But the connections with other “rights concerned affairs” also jumble it. For example, the “environment justice” in response of  the environmental unequal problem, especially the un-equality of rights in environment field between强势群体弱势群体.(6)

So one of its biggest problems is to figure out an accurate relation.

(6)“环境正义运动”及其对当代环境伦理的影响 王韬洋 清华大学哲学系博士研究生

 

5.      Future prospect (under considering)

For many reasons, like the social and cultural background of 1960s, pragmatism is more efficient in the past. The content before seem that I think its defects is more essential. Actually I think them both equally. The debate between pragmatism and idealism will not end, just as the one in political field. We can simply use them respectively in different situations. In specific issues we can use pragmatism. And for education, we’d better use idealism.

 

Conclusion (tentative): For 1960s’ America, pragmatism is the more efficient one. On the contrary, for now idealism may be the elected, although its road must be circuitous. In the long run, we must combine these two.

Topic: The Two Diverged Roads of American Environment Thought:Pragmatism and Idealism

Thesis statement: In the mainstream of American Environment thought, there’re two diverged roads, which we can describe as pragmatism and idealism and their supporters have led a really long history of antagonism. In this thesis I mainly use four figures that is Gifford Pinchot, Rachel Carson, John Muir and Aldo Leopold to analyze the character of these two kinds.

Key words

American environment thoughts; pragmatism; idealism;wisely use;land ethic;conservation and preservation

Rationale

Nowadays environment movements around the world move into a stagnant situation, which largely due to the defects of theory. So to study the theory may become a way to solve this problem.

Detailed Outline

1.Background information(see spider map)

 

We can devided the mainstream of American Evironment Thought into two distinct routes:the pragmatism and the idealism. I want to analyze these two different routes through comparing two distinguished figures in environment history representing the two kinds respectively, whom is Aldo Leopold and Rachel Carson.

my main reference: Encyclopedia Britannica

 

I talked to my peers, who gave me really advisable suggestion. My topic is American Environment Movement, so I first sort it up by period. That is before 20th century, first half of 20^th century—especially 1960s-- and now. each of these periods has different properties and generated different thoughts, figures and events. To pick up one means I can cut down 2/3. So I chose the first half of 20^th century—especially 1960s. the reason is it is like present China most..

Only the 1960s also has tremendous amount of issues that are impossible to comprise all. So I have to put another restrict. Second step I considered about famous figures and thoughts to be my research object. I'm working on it^^

My largest problem now is how to narrow down my topic. American Environment Movement is such a huge area that I've completely got confused. As a science student, I used to estimate this too shallow and easy and apperently comes the punishment-_-

Also, I found that to such a cosiderable extent can the thinking methods of social science and natural science vary. This semister is going to be a brand new voyage for me and I can learn so much through this unpredictable journey.^^

Yes, I should make my research more connective to our country.

This week I've found lots of information using internet, too much I'm afraid. There are various aspects of environment movement, like famous thoughts, historic figures, critical events, complicated situations of politics and culture...Of course I cannot write them all, so apparently I have to pick one or two of these. Maybe I should read more before decide.

Also, I found it very useful what I learnt in class. I didn't know data base before and when I search in internet only about 1\50 of the information makes sense.Now I'm downloading note express and inspiration. I believe they're going to help me a lot.

我正准备申请校长基金，在陶老师的实验室作本科生科研，所以我原本打算写有关POPs(persistance organic pollutants)的论文，正好为将来的研究服务。因此我去找陶老师。陶老师非常忙，尽管提前预约了，我找到他的时候他正在开会，所以我们只谈了大约10分钟的时间（以前曾经谈过，我大概知道将来的研究方向）。我问他我现在应该做什么样的准备，比如看什么样的资料。没想到老师说，什么都不用。我对他说了这门课的事，说我想写这方面的论文。老师说，对我来说太早了，至少要等到学完有机化学、环境化学等一系列专业课才有这种基础。一般都是先作半年实验，在过程中学习实验能力和技巧，同时学习专业知识，现在写的话肯定很“科普”；网络英语写作这门课很好，他也很支持我上这门课，但是并不建议我现在写POPs的论文。

听到这样的话虽然有点郁闷，但的确是事实。我想，以后我会有很长时间和专业打交道，何不趁现在研究一些其他感兴趣的东西呢？ 所以我决定写另一个方向，研究美国的环境运动，和我的专业有关。虽然人文社科的领域对我来说十分陌生，最后的结果也许写的很科普，但是因为有兴趣，因此想尝试一下。

下周我打算找一下这方面的老师再做一次interview.

 

陶澍老师：北京大学环境学院讲师、副教授、教授、长江特聘教授

Actually I don't know exactly the meaning of rubric. So I take it a standard of assesment. Is that right? If so, I think it's:

1, thoughtful in content

2, in express:accuracy,concise(means that every word and sentence must make sense so that can't be removed)

3, in organization:logical and concise(means that every resources left is useful and indispensable)

Sigh, when I was in high school I always admired the diverse choices college students had, totally not aware that someday choices would bother me so much. Especially I have to decide myself now.

I know that whatever I choose can neither be wrong……