Differences Between Nature And Culture

(text, 59) I think that a devastating environment can create devastating people. For example, in 2005 Hurricane Katrina devastated thousands it not millions of people. The negative change in the environment caused a negative change in how many people conducted themselves. People were stealing and looting for things that they needed or wanted. These actions were like those of savages. I view this to be similar to the revisit of flood destruction found in Mesopotamia.

All disasters are either natural or man-made. Majority of the United States’ most costly disasters have been natural disasters (Steinberg, 2006). Ted Steinberg, an environmental historian, uses Acts of God to analyze how American interference with nature intensifies the harmfulness of natural disasters. Steinberg (2006), states “those in power have tended to view these events as purely natural in an effort to justify a set of responses that has proved both environmentally unsound, and socially, if not morally, bankrupt”(p.19). This book selectively exhibits solid facts pertaining to specific natural disasters; namely hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes. In this manner, Steinberg attempts to persuade readers of the idea that natural disasters are not outside of human control or consequence. The idea of an “act of God” was initially from the idea that natural disasters were a result of punishment for sin (Steinberg, 2006). When Americans started to venture from the idea of natural disasters being a result of human actions, the assumption arose that natural disasters were without human culpability.

In many ways, modern environmental disasters serve as literal and symbolic reminders of the absolutely barbarous history of colonization, a history built on resource extraction and ecological devastation, a history many in power hope to silence and forget.

Throughout today’s society there are several different cultural perspectives which form theoretical and practical understandings of natural environments, creating various human-nature relationship types. In this essay, I will describe and evaluate different ways of knowing nature and the impact of these views on human-nature relationships. From this, I will then explore my own human-nature relationship and reflect on how my personal experiences, beliefs and values has led me to this view, whilst highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each and reflecting upon Martin’s (1996) continuum.

Natural disasters are a part of our lives as humans. If you’ve never been in one then you've probably heard of one or been taught about one. There effects are devastating and tragic. Those who are lost in such unexpected ways are some of the most memorable and mourned. Though disasters may be more prominent in some places, such a Haiti, they are not specific to one place, rather found all over the world and endured by many. Throughout Leonard Pitts article Sometimes the Earth is Cruel, the idea that the Earth is undeniably, unwaveringly, and inescapably cruel is an important and prevalent theme.

Similar to Cronon’s Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature, Evernden discusses the concept of nature in today’s society and the impacts of mixing meanings of the term nature. Evernden begins by elaborating on the term nature and using the concept of nature to support contrasting ideas. The author continues by philosophically analyzing two questions about nature: What does the word nature mean? What is nature? Evernden then discusses several definitions and understandings of the term nature. A few of the definitions of nature mentioned are as follows: nature meaning kind; nature as a danger; nature as an assertion of relationships. He relates these concepts to the term phusis, and then goes into detail about the Greek origins

Reading William Cronon and Neil Smith, I came to understand that each of the two authors introduces us to a different approach of human conceptual relationship with nature. In The Trouble with Wilderness, William Cronon speaks about how we reject our responsibility toward nature and the potential danger existing in our conception of wilderness (or nature).  On the other hand, Neil Smith in The Production of Nature introduces us to how humanity transforms the nature in the process of producing commodities.

The frameworks and paradigms that people use to define and describe events in the environment have substantive influence on their perspectives regarding remedies and solutions to perceived problems and challenges. Fundamental approaches to decfliction can be applied to situations, circumstances, and events that impact not only how they are perceived, but the outcomes that they are able to achieve.

The above quote was spoken by a Mr. Jim Willis and quoted by the Washington Post. It summarized perfectly how a natural disaster has the ability to unmask the disparities of society. On August 29th, 2005, a moment in American history was being created. This moment has come to be known as Hurricane Katrina. Her high wind speeds and three days of endless rain led to numerous deaths and astronomical amounts of damages for the residents of Louisiana and Mississippi. Although her terror only lasted for three taunting days, just like the residue she left behind, she also left residents with emotional, physical, and psychosocial scars.

Val Plumwood in her essay “Paths Beyond Human-Centeredness,” illustrates the impact that humans have on nature and non-animals when it comes to preserving environments. Understanding that nature has it’s living properties that let it thrive among its resources allows for people to grasp the complexities that come about when construction companies destroy the environment in which they work. Plumwood uses the term dualism to refer to the sharp distinction between two classes of individuals. There is the high class, which is considered as the “One.” In contrast, the other side of the division consists of individuals that are classified as lower and are subordinates to the “One” as “Others.” This account on dualism allows the reader to understand how humans can significantly alter the environment because of the way they perceive its resources and inhabitants. Plumwood defines five characteristics that illustrate the oppressive actions that change the connection between human relations and the relationship between humans and nature.

To some degree, it could be reasoned that a disaster, whether natural or man-made, has the potential to distinguish social classes within a community or nation; As the saying goes, the cream will rise to the top. However, it is crucial to note that while differences among humans may be augmented in times of devastation, they may also be abolished altogether. Indeed, in many cases having a shared hardship can practically “level the playing field” in terms of social, gender, racial, or national distinctions. After all, catastrophe knows not who is rich or poor, young or old, male or female, nor does it care. This concept is distinctly portrayed in John Hersey’s Hiroshima, in which the triviality of factors such as nationality, gender, and social

Nature as w e know it means different things to different people. To an economist, natural is often seen as a resource to be transformed and put in readiness for human use. An alternative view is that humans are stewards who should care for natural things as well as making use of nature’s bounty. Another view is that nature of animism, which sees nature as a living thing, something to be respected and not controlled. Some native American’s view the earth as a sacred place could be called animist. Another alternative view is that the entire planet earth is a self correcting system based on a symbiotic relationship between the earth and the living beings(Peacock,

White’s thesis in The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis states that in order to confront the expanding environmental crises, humans must begin to analyze and alter their treatment and attitudes towards nature. The slow destruction of the environment derives from the Western scientific and technological advancements made since the Medieval time period. “What people do about their ecology depends on what they think about themselves in relation to things around them” (RON p.7). Technology and science alone will not be able to save humans until we adjust the way of thinking and suppress the old ideas of humans power above nature. Instead, we need to learn how to think of ourselves as being

As the Marxist approach puts it, “underlying states of human marginalisation are conceived as the principle cause of disaster.” (Pelling, 2001, p. 179). This resource exclusion to particular categories of people within society creates their vulnerability to risk, and in turn disaster. McLaughlin and Dietz (2007) suggest there are three dimensions that make up vulnerability including exposure, sensitivity and resilience. An example displaying the vulnerability of lower classed social categories is in North Bihar, India, where floods have been managed through engineering works to create embankments. While the Government appears to be reducing the hazard, this has increased the vulnerability of the local people. Soil fertility has decreased reducing agricultural success, dangerous flash floods are occurring due to embankment walls collapsing and communities have settled on apparently safe embankments and are now highly exposed (Pelling, 2001). The natural flood hazard was dangerous, but these works by society have created a natural disaster (Pelling, 2001). Power inequalities have created this disastrous situation where lower classes are at high exposure to floods due to profit hungry management bodies. This technological approach is clearly failing but the Government and other managing groups make large profits off flood engineering works and have the power to decide how to control the issue (Pelling, 2001). This has resulted in creating

Nearly everything that a human does is in response to the environment. Our lives are defined by what is around us and what we find in front of us, whether this means accepting, dealing with or changing it. This has been the pattern since primates first stood up and became Homo erectus, and has continued until we considered ourselves doubly wise. The shape of the land affected where humans moved. Weather was something with which to contend. Fire affected humans until they conquered it – and herein lies the core of the relationship. The earth affects humans, and humans affect it back, viewing characteristics and patterns as problems and challenges, and finding a solution.