The Environmental Issue From Hell Ibsen Analysis

Carson’s primary argument is that the ecosystem is unable to adjust and rebalance itself due to the rapidity of the introduction of chemicals into the environment. She points to the common knowledge that it took hundreds of millions of years for life to evolve to its current state. She goes on to explain how, given time (eons), the environment adjusted to natural dangers such as radiation emitted from certain rocks and short-wave radiation from the sun, but that it is impossible for the earth to adjust and rebalance in the face of man-made threats in the relative miniscule timeframe of decades. Her appeal is both logical and emotional. Logically, chemicals sprayed on croplands, forests or gardens will kill not just “pests” but other living organisms, and that some amount of these chemicals will end up in ground water, causing problems for anyone or anything that depends on this water. Emotionally if the possibility of permanent gene damage, which cause deformities, cancers, and early death, is not enough to encourage a second look at this issue then there is no hope for the planet’s future.

McKibben implicitly states that humans have “killed off nature,” (pg. 82) and details that we stand at a cusp ushering in a new era of change. McKibben expresses uncertainty in the accurate reading from the changes soon to come, and implies that developments will happen in eventually. Regarding the considerable concern for rising sea levels, McKibben refers to his previously mentioned gases found in the atmosphere and correlates them to the an increase in sea levels in the future. (pg. 94) Arguably, there is no obsolete notion that this will happen, but McKibben’s statement of confidence persuades readers effectively. Furthermore, McKibben frequently visits back to topics he mentioned before and addresses in which specific fashion this will affect the environment. (ie. DDT-pg. 126, Artic ice pg. 84) In a sense, McKibben makes sure that readers remain focused and understands the true outcome of both laziness and action.

Rachel Carson is a noted biologist who studies biology, a branch of science addressing living organisms, yet she has written a book called Silent Spring to speak about the harmful effects of pesticides on nature. Carson doesn’t write about birds’ genetic and physical makeup, the role of them in the animal food chain, or even how to identify their unbelievable bird songs, yet strongly attests the fight for a well developed environment containing birds, humans, and insects is just and necessary. To Carson, the war for a natural environment is instantly essential for holding on to her true love for the study of biology. Thus Carson claims that whether it be a direct hit towards birds or an indirect hit towards humans and wildlife, farmers need to understand the effects and abandon the usage of pesticides in order to save the environment by appealing to officials, farmers, and Americans in her 1962 book, Silent Spring. She positions her defense by using rhetorical devices such as rhetorical questioning to establish logos, juxtaposing ideas, and using connotative and denotative diction.

In her essay “The Obligation to Endure”, Rachel Carson alerts the public to the dangers of modern industrial pollution. She writes about the harmful consequences of lethal materials being released into the environment. She uses horrifying evidence, a passionate tone, audience, and the overall structure of her essay to express to her readers that the pollution created by man wounds the earth. There are many different ways that pollution can harm the environment, from the nuclear explosions discharging toxic chemicals into the air, to the venomous pesticides sprayed on plants that kills vegetation and sickens cattle. The adjustments to these chemicals would take generations. Rachel

Mckibben inaugurates his third paragraph suggesting that we make the environmental issues, “"the great moral crisis of our time, and the equivalent of the civil rights movement of the 1960s."(747). He uses this analogy to explain that in his opinion, we are strip-mining the present and destroying all of whom come after it. Thus, leading him to discuss exactly how humans’ materialistic ways have impacted the earth. From Bangladesh living three months in thigh high-deep water, to polar bears becoming “20% scrawnier than they were a decade ago” (748). The environmentalist writer goes on to discuss how to deal with global warming since it is indeed creeping up on us.

While environmental questions are frequently channeled through practical and economic prisms, it is also appropriate to consider our econolgy as a function of morality. The ethical dilemmas which contribute to our policies and our behaviors regarding the use of fossil fuels and our attention to global climate change are frequently overshadowed by more immediate concerns of survival or mere comfort.

In Michael Pollan’s article “Why Bother?”, he addresses the issue of climate change and the inner reasoning behind those who don’t acknowledge or bother with the crisis. Pollan intertwines a discussion of the rising danger of global warming with a psychological discussion of personal virtue. He emphasis his main point of climate crisis by providing examples and data stating, “we have only ten years left to start cutting—not just slowing—the amount of carbon we’re emitting…So:eight years left and a great deal to do.” (117). His discussion of personal reasoning to the problem of people not responding to global warming is intertwined through the direct question that is the title and by other experiences such as Wendell Berry’s comments on the

In Michael Pollan's article “Why Bother?” he discusses how climate change is a serious threat to humanity and needs to be addressed immediately. Pollan begins to discuss possible solutions but also realizes that these “solutions” may not be easily achieved. There is no way to eliminate people who make a conscious effort to help the advancement of climate change, but it is still important for others to attempt to make changes to help save the environment.

In regards to climate change and the fight against destructive tendencies, there is always two battles to be fought. On one hand, scientists must learn more about the Earth’s systems and other ecological mysteries. On the other hand, environmental preservation needs everyone on board, and so it is imperative to convince the global population of climate change’s validity. Greg Garrard’s addresses both of these issues in his article Conciliation and Consilience: Climate Change in Barbara Kingsolver’s Flight Behaviour. Garrard elaborates how Kingsolver masterfully balances the dynamics between science and public reception, although I disagree with several literary arguments he makes.

The essay opens up with McKibben talking about how the political campaign against global warming is flawed because at our current point there is nothing much that can be done to fix it.(Mckibben,1) He then goes to state that humans are the biggest culprit behind global warming and supports this by giving examples such as SUVs and American ignorance.(2,9) He concludes by saying that if ten percent of America were to go green, it still would not save the planet, but ten percent could get the government’s attention to pass laws making everyone go green. (11)

In The Obligation to Endure, Rachel Carson strongly expresses her opinions on the excessive use of pesticides and other chemicals in today's world. Carson claims that all the use if these chemicals ate slowly poisoning the earth, animals, food, and our bodies. This essay starts out with the statement, "The history of life on earth has been an interaction between living things and their surroundings" (329). I think Carson choose wisely when using this as her opening statement because she gets her readings thinking right from the beginning. Not only does Carsons essay catch her readers attention, she also presents her views on this topic and then backs it up with supporting evidence and facts; in turn making a very convincing argument.

In this essay “The Obligation to Endure,” Rachel Carson gives a brief expiation of how important the environment is for living things and its surroundings. Carson claims that people who are not aware of the possible harm and contamination are controlling the poisonous chemicals, which leaves the environment in danger. She argues that the increasing rate of change happened because of the circumstances that were created by men who rushed to make a decision without thinking of the consequences to nature. The writer also emphasizes that how men create unnatural chemicals will take the lives of generations before the environment and humans adjust to it. Carson claims that the use of pesticides to control insects is unsafe because this powerful chemical

Rachel Carson played a pivotal role in shaping the Environmental Movement and American culture because of her honest, direct disclosure of the matters at hand. Although Carson was not the first person to make these scientific discoveries, she was able to radically change the way millions of Americans perceived the environment and the dangers of toxic chemicals to themselves through vivid, articulate, yet easily understandable language. For instance, in her chapter titled “Elixirs of Death,” she says “For these chemicals are now stored in the bodies of the vast majority of human beings, regardless of age. They

We as members of the human race, need to recognize the disregarding we show towards the environment because it may not be long before until this devastation can occur. Though, the way Carson brought up her perspective, may not be an opinion of what the reader may see when taken into deep consideration. The different tactics Carson approaches this topic lets readers think out of the box. It is a matter of opinion of what the reader may see when taken into perspective. We all have different outlooks and aspects when reading, watching, or listening to a scenario. However, one thing we all have in common is our unique minds to how we perceive it, just like how Rachel Carson distinctively uses imagery and rhetorical devices to convey her aspect, unlike any other

Global Warming is the number one concern threatening the very existence of humans and everything within the environment today. The human race is to blame for the destruction of the natural world. The environmental issues that are threatening all human and non-human life today, started in the industrial revolution and the discovery of oil The need to improve the quality of life resulted in the construction of factories to mass produce products for consumers. These factories were powered by fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas. The combustion of these fossil fuels emitted great quantities of pollutants that remain in the Earths atmosphere to this day and is the number one cause of global warming. However, in ethics one cannot evaluate just one thing. In ethics, as in nature, everything is connected to everything else (Partridge, 1998).