Upgrade to remove ads
Only $2.99/month

EVS Exam 2

Terms in this set (35)

Annie Dillard
Her book Pilgrim at Tinker Creek (1974), in which she writes about the natural world near her home in Virginia, won the 1975 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction, and is, perhaps her most well-known book. If you want to know her, read her writings.
Richard Louv
His best-selling book Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children From Nature-Deficit Disorder (2005) "has created a national conversation about the disconnection between children and nature, and his message has galvanized an international movement."
Calvin DeWitt
Founding director of Au Sable Institute (1979-2004). Co-founder of the EEN (Evangelical Environmental Network). Has been referred to as the modern day father of Christian environmentalism
Rachel Carson
Wrote several books on natural history. Her best-seller Silent Spring(1962) increased public awareness of environmental issues in America, especially the effects of pesticides and led to U.S. bans on DDT and other pesticides. Often credited with inspiring the environmental movement.
Wendell Berry
Proponent of sustainable agriculture, living in community, connection to place, and local economics, and the value of work. Critical of industrial farming and the industrialization of life, and global economics. A Christian himself, he criticizes Christian organizations that are complacent about environmental degradation.
Joel Salatin
Joel Salatin and his farm are featured in Michael Pollan's book The Omnivore's Dilemma and in the documentary films Food Inc. and Fresh, as an example of sustainable livestock production. He uses holistic management practices to raise livestock on his farm and is critical of industrial agriculture and the regulations on food production that are imposed by government agencies. He is a strong proponent of local food and a critic of industrial organic food production
Michael Pollan
A common topic of his writings is the topic of food and systems of food production, and the American way of eating. Two of his best-known books are The Botany of Desire (2001) and The Omnivore's Dilemma (2006) Like Wendell Berry, Pollan favors local and organic agriculture over industrialized agriculture.
Harold Snyder
Founded Au Sable Trails and led its transition to become Au Sable Institute of Environmental Studies.
Garrett Hardin
His 1968 paper "The Tragedy of the Commons" and the concept by the same name are often cited in discussions of resource use and sustainability. [see "Can Selfishness Save the Environment" for a summary of this concept.]
How can you become better at "seeing" nature, and how can you help others "see?" What insight does Annie Dillard provide into these questions?
-Dillard focuses on seeing as an intentional observation, that leads to a mediation of what you are seeing. Dillard emphasises a more detailed observation of what we are accustomed to, forcing us to deeply process what we might pass over before.

Be more present and aware of creation. Take notice. Feel nature. Dillard is about the story of nature; respect is big for her. The lover (in love with nature) and the knowledgeable (those who know/specialists) see. Specialists can see things the rest of us aren't capable of. We conserve what we love and we love only what we understand. We seldom value what we cannot name. Dillard - I'd like to know & care. It's a matter of keeping my eyes open. You must verbalize what you see.

Awareness → Appreciation → Stewardship.
seeing/knowing. Loving. Understanding. Knowing. Wonder. Enjoyment. Health of the earth.
Tolerate → Respect → Stewardship.
Summarize the main ideas presented in Richard Louv's book Last Child in the Woods. Why is it important for children (and people of all ages) to spend time in nature?
Louv is informative, research, scientific, analytical. He wants us to take notice of nature. He wants us to take direct notice of nature. The 'loose parts' theory - kids are more creative and nature is full of loose parts. There is a natural healthy interaction between us and nature. We need it to be healthy and develop and grow and channel our energies. We tend to lose our nature perspective when we get older (if we had it in the first place). We live today in a 'nature deficit'. Today, kids are aware of the global threats to the environment, but their physical contact, their intimacy with nature, is fading. There is accumulating research that reveals the necessity of contact with nature for healthy child - and adult - development. Our modern-day thoughts connect nature with doom. The health of the earth is at stake too. How the young respond to nature, how they raise their kids, etc. will shape the future.
Describe how these four aspects of our interaction with creation are interconnected
- seeing, Just physically opening your eyes. Looking up from the smart-screens. Being outside.

- knowing /awareness Consciously considering. Looking around purposely and focusing our minds on what we see around us. Hearing the birds.

- loving /appreciating Understanding enough to feel an emotional and cognitive connection and appreciation for. An emotional response

- caring for / stewarding Actions on the individual and group level. Recycling, encouraging others to reduce, reuse, recycle. Joining or supporting organizations that act on policy changes or large-scale operations. Spreading awareness and word.
In Silent Spring, what arguments does Rachel Carson give for why we should protect the environment?
Beneficial argument = the interconnectedness of the ecosystem and being aware of unintended consequences. Watching out for biological magnification. Flourishing depends on relationships which is more important than affluence. Flourishing = doing what we're called and purposed to do. The mindset and awareness of increasing luxury is harming us and our system. What inconveniences are you willing to give up? All aspects of our lives belong to God. The return of the birds cannot be taken for granted.

When the environment is degraded, the pleasure of it are removed, for example the hunter fisher or bird watcher are deprived if wildlife are depleted. Care for the birds because they regulate harmful insects.
In the 1960's efforts were made to control Dutch elm disease by spraying elm trees with pesticides. Why were these efforts ineffective, and even counter-productive (actually making the disease spread faster in the long-run)?
Analyses showed high concentrations of DDT in the testes and ovaries of breeding birds. The DDT would stick to the leaves and then become detritus that the earthworms ate and then birds would eat the earthworms and biological magnification would occur.

The spraying destroys any natural enemies of the bark beetle that spreads the elm disease. Also, by destroying the environment - when a drought comes, that gives extra favorable conditions for the harmful insect to thrive.

NY entomologists have learned that beetle-breeding material have real importance in the spread. They concentrate on this material destruction as well as immediate remove and sanitation of diseased wood.
Was Rachel Carson against all use of pesticides? Explain.
She is not against environmentally friendly pesticides. She is a big proponent for alternative greener methods that work within the established system (like forest genetics, removing breeding material, increasing the predatory creatures, replanting, etc. She might be for pesticides that target rather than just kill indiscriminately (like DDT). She wants people to ask "Isn't it possible to help the balance of nature without destroying it?"
What do Dave Warners and Larry Borst mean when they speak of the "flourishing" of humans and creation"?
Flourishing → relationships > affluence. Seeking God in a culture of affluence. A certain level of affluence is needed, but only to meet your basic needs. Flourishing is finding contentment. Think of developing countries, if we come in with the idea of flourishing = affluence, we can really mess with the culture. We have a call to help the creation flourish à doing what we're called & purpose of doing. If you don't develop self-control, your life will fall apart.
Is human flourishing at odds with the flourishing of the rest of creation? Explain.
It is when flourishing is equated with affluence, materialism, and general selfishness. We get what we what when we want no matter the cost to creation. Human affluence typically comes at a cost to nonhuman creation. Luxury items are well above that of subsistence living. We believe or live like we believe resources are endless.
What guidelines or advice do Warners & Borst provide for those who would seek the flourishing of creation?
We need a healing with our Lord - Shalom. God showing us His provision. Trusting him. We need a food system that forgives. For most Christians, we don't consider that the way we eat is a treatment of animals. It never occurred to us we might be hypocrites. They promote shalomic living. Flourishing is more than material and it includes all creation. As community members we are in relationship with future generations as well. We are depended on the integrated communities within which we exist. God's nature is of utmost importance as we think about and live out our relationships within the created world. We need to keep and cultivate the world. Limits are a part of God's good and perfect creation. We should have an economy of care and an economy of enough. Shalom is God's dream and promise for the fulfillment of His creation. Our personhood is fundamentally relational.
What major concerns do these authors (collectively) have about the American food system?
The industrial economy is a mistreatment and abuse of creation and technology. We eat processed foods devoid of having a hand in their making. We have no connection to what we eat. We need a correct attitude towards food to build a logical cohesive ethic relating to all of creation, our lives, and our causes. Food, the simplest daily thing, must be dealt with correctly become we can be credible for any other issue we may try to address. Eating is an agricultural act. By not eating well, we've lost credibility - the environmentalists are the ones bringing awareness to the problem and it's the religious right mocking them. we've squandered our credibility as earth stewards. Rush Limbach. Environmentalists think its horrible. Food and eating are not amoral - we can bring glory to God and He is interested in it.
Are they optimistic about the ability of consumers to influence the system to bring about change?
A food system that honors God would be forgiving (ecologically and resilient). We need a system that builds soil and sequesters carbon. We need a system that heals the land. Profit never exceeds the forgiveness of ecology. Ecology must be diversified, encouraging more springs and water, it should be forgiving emotionally - encouraging relationships à more farmers on the land. The intellectual agrarian - you must respect yourself and present yourself as such. Happy families, romance the next generation, customer closeness, etc. Economically forgiving à farming is profitable! In-source fertility. Farms should be seen as beautiful and romantic rather than nuances and blights. Humble - exudes children gardening, etc

Life is for keeps - irreplaceable, not just for us. Our culture needs a humility. A food system that respects soul and tradition. Our food system needs to be about healing. It's not all just about exploitation and money. It's extending redemption to a visceral way to the creation around us. Honoring God. Ultimately that benefits us all. Animals have rights "don't muzzle the ox during its work"; animals are an extension of use "if an ox kills a neighbor the owner is killed".
Explain Wendell Berry's idea of "eating responsibly." What are some ways a person can begin to do this? What additional advice does Michael Pollan provide? Explain how these suggested behaviors are expressions of Christian ethical principles of creation care such as stewardship, service, flourishing, and reconciliation.
Eating is an agricultural act. Do not be passive consumers. We do not understand the connection between eating and the land. One reason to eat responsibly is to live free (do not be controlled by what the producers are telling you). Industrial food production is harmful to the environment.
Some ways a person can do this:

1. Grow some food for yourself; garden
2. Prepare your own food
3. Learn the origins of the food you buy; buy the food that is produced closest to your home
4. Deal directly with a farmer, gardener, or orchardist.
5. Learn about the food production process.
6. Learn about what is involved in the best farming and gardening.
7. Learn as much as you can of the life history of the food species.

Michael Pollan:

Dont eat anything your great great grandmother wouldn't recognize as food
Eat food not food products
Avoid foods containing high fructose corn syrup
Spend more, eat less (the more nutritious something is, the less you need to eat to feel satisfied)
Don't pay attention to science and health claims on packages
Shop at the farmers market
The title of Joel Salatin's speech at Patrick Henry College was "Food: The Cornerstone of Christian Credibility." Explain this title.
We need a correct attitude towards food to build a logical cohesive ethic relating to all of creation, our lives, and our causes. Food, the simplest daily thing, must be dealt with correctly before we can be credible for any other issue we may try to address.
When we manipulate animals how we want we lose respect for the least and then our foundations are all wrong to respect the greatest of these. What we say, matching up with what we do, depends on how we eat. Making our lip and life match. The ultimate way to make this respect is to respect and honor the animals we eat.
We are in the redemption business; healing the culture, food, etc. "Whatever you do, eat or drink, do that to the glory of God" indicates the depth to which God is involved in our lives. Such a basic fundamental part. There's nothing that is 'amoral' in our life. God is interested in all we do, therefore, what brings glory to God? God established an order out of chaos.

A problem he sees: the environmentalists are the ones bringing awareness to the problem and it's the religious right mocking them. We've squandered our credibility as earth stewards. Rush Limbach. Environmentalists think it's horrible. Thus, when we come in and speak of saving baby humans, we're contradictory. We say one thing, but that preservation of life is not seen in all areas of our life.
Explain Michael Pollan's reasons for concern about the dominance of corn (and soy) in the American food supply.
The corn we eat is invisible, heavily processed before it reaches our bodies. The meat we eat has been fed corn, even though it should not be a part of their diet. This is harmful to their bodies.
Sweeteners are now so cheap (because they are made of corn products) that it is much, much easier to produce highly processed and unhealthy foods and drinks -->obesity
High fructose corn syrup is metabolized differently than natural sweeteners (elevates triglycerides)
Modern corn hybrids require more nitrogen fertilizer and more pesticides (runoff kills marine life)
Briefly compare and contrast the "Cornwall Declaration" and "An Evangelical Declaration on the Care of Creation." With which do you tend to agree more and why? (Hint: some key points of contrast include how they view environmental problems, proposed solutions, and priorities/goals)
EVANGELICAL declaration on the care of creation: we're facing 1. Land degradation, 2. Deforestation, 3. species extinction, 4. Water degradation, 5. Global toxification, 6. Alteration of the atmosphere, 7. Human and cultural degradation. We are pressing against the finite limits God set for creation. God calls us to confess and repent of attitudes of devaluing creation. Our actions and attitudes need to proceed from the center of our faith, rooted in God. We need to seek carefully to learn all the bible tells us about the creator, creation and the human task. We need to understand what creation reveals about God. God is transcendent and immanent. God is relational in very

CORNWALL declaration on environmental stewardship: human understanding and control can improve or harm creation. Humans are not principally consumers and polluters but we're viewed as such. We can be producers and stewards and must be to add to earth's abundance. Many people believe that 'nature knows best' and should be left untouched as the ideal - this is wrong. We alone are capable of developing other resources and enriching creation; therefore, humans are the most valuable resource. There are true problems: human health, inadequate sanitation, widespread use of biomass fuels, primitive agriculture, industrial and commercial practices, distorted resource consumption, improper disposal of hazardous waste, etc. there are also unfounded concerns: global warming, over population, and rampant species loss. The real problems are proven, well understood, and localized. The later are speculative, global, and cataclysmic. The former is of concern to people in developing nations and the latter to wealthier nations. The former is of high and established risk to human life and health. The latter are v. low and hypothetical in risk. Solutions to the first are cost effective with proven benefit and the latter are costly and dubious benefit. Public policies to combat exaggerated risks can dangerously delay or reverse the economic development necessary to improve not only human life, but also stewardship of the environment. It has human development in mind.
How do the perspectives and approaches of Christians and Christian conservation organizations (FBO's) differ from those of secular conservation organizations? How do these differences contribute to the effectiveness of faith-based organizations in their creation-care efforts? (VanDyke Ch8)
FBOs have a value rational approach rather than a goal-rational approach. Their underlying aim is to transform human character and relationship to the environment through an altered set of values that their members hold as a part of their larger belief structure.
"Technical competency vs. moral endeavor"
NGOs perceive problems in conservation as problems of cost and benefits that can be managed by welfare maximization strategies, whereas FBOs view them as problems between consumption and conscience. They say that the problem can be solved if people can distinguish between their desires and the desires they ought to have.
NGOs are more likely to define priority conservation targets as those most immediately threatened or with the highest biodiversity. FBOs consider both the environment and the people in it.
The members of FBO's recognize that the land ultimately does not belong to them, and therefore, they strive to maintain biodiversity in any way they can.
How does the concept of reconciliation differ from the concept of preservation? Which is a more Biblical approach to caring for creation and why? (See Van Dyke p. 161 and Ch8)
The issue is not to preserve nature from human destruction, but rather reconcile human beings to nature, or restore the relationship between the two. It is not a problem of technological misapplication and industrial pollution, but rather an alienation among humans, nature, and God.
How did Susan Drake Emmerich's approach to the Tangier watermen's problem exemplify a biblical view of reconciliation and a Christian approach to creation care and conservation?
She reached out to the fishermen on their level and in their terms by living in the community and engaging with them. She didn't just dictate new laws for them to follow. She tied their faith into how they treated the environment. They wanted to help the environment because she got them to see how it would preserve their way of life - something they held reverent. They held each other accountable and they would all suffer or thrive as a community. The problem with the environment isn't 'things', but the way we relate to the environment. She made connections to core values.
Consider the conservation work that many faith-based organizations (FBO's) engage in (described in VanDyke Ch 8). In what way might this work be considered "compassionate conservation?" Contrast this with Marc Bekoff's definition of "Compassionate Conservation." How do the two differ in priorities, goals, and assumptions?
Compassionate conservation: do no intentional harm, respect all life, treat all individuals with respect and dignity, and tread lightly when stepping into the lives of animals
Conseravtion work of FBOs- consider the people when figuring out how to deal with an environmental problem
Sometimes target specific groups of people
What value does creation have, and what arguments does VanDyke provide for each of the 3 types of value? (including the 3 components of aesthetic value) (Ch 9)
-instrumental value, aesthetic value, intrinsic value.
- aesthetic value- seeing/joy, appreciation, contemplation or spiritual understanding; God SAW that it was good.

Instrumental value- each part of the created order serves the needs of others. The one is to serve all.

Intrinsic value- all things created are good in and of themselves. God saw that creation was good, but he needs nothing and is dependent on nothing and humans were not yet created.
What is the connection between VanDyke's understanding of creation's instrumental value (p. 194-195) and Warners & Borst's concept of the flourishing of creation? How does VanDyke's concept of instrumental value differ from most people's understanding of instrumental value?
Vandykes says all of creation is instrumental to each other. We need each other to flourish. We cannot live without the rest of creation
Warners and Borst state that God wants all of creation to flourish. A good ruler will ensure that the subjects are allowed to flourish.
All of creation must flourish
We need at least a small amount of resources to be able to flourish; we cannot just live on the very bare minimum
The way we use our resources will affect the rest of creation
Shalom: healing of brokenness
Summarize Garret Hardin's concept of "The Tragedy of the Commons"
Individual rational behavior deteriorates into collective ruin. This means If the individual does what is best for them, it will translate to a poor choice for the community.
According to Hardin, what are the two possible solutions to the problem (i.e. ways to avoid overexploiting commons)?
Privatize them so there are owner has costs and benefits, giving incentive. The other is regulation by laws and punishment.
Contrast Ridley & Low's perspective with that of John Silvius. Explain the "duty ethics" and "virtue ethics" concepts described by Silvius.
Silvius says taht christians who fear God acquires a sense of reverence that motivates obedience and exemplary living. Environmental stewardship has a deeper root than fear of consequences. Creation must be cared for because God made it.
Duty ethics: doing something because we understand that it belongs to God and it is our responsibility to care for it
Virtue ethics: concerned not only with what we do, but who we become as we do it.
Christians will perform acts of creation care not only because they have a sense of duty but because it is an outward expression of moral virtues
In what ways are humans connected with the rest of creation? (Hiebert)
-Made from the earth, we are comprised of the same materials that creation is made of
-adamah aka Farmers, shows we have a relationship with the land
-Land provides for humans, and for all other creation. We are dependent on the land
-We are creatures like the other creatures
-We are servants
How does viewing ourselves as servants of creation differ from viewing ourselves as stewards of creation? What are the strengths and weaknesses (criticisms) of each of these metaphors? Which of the two is a more Biblical model for how humans should relate to the rest of creation and why? (Hiebert, especially p. 14-15; VanDyke Ch9; Sadar & Cammarata; Beisner; Silvius)
Vandyke thinks stewardship becomes a problem because it describes people ruling over creation rather than service toward it. Stewardship is idolatrous and potentially destructive, whereas servanthood is the humble attitude we should hold in regards to creation.
Silvius says that as christians we have a duty to be stewards toward creation, but we also have the virtue that allows us to do it in a way that is beneficial.
Sadar and Cammarata: we should be in more service to people, but be careful stewards of the earth. Compassionate aid of the needy with resources while still prioritizing careful stewardship.
Hiebert views us as servants. Says that stewardship is not the entire biblical narrative.

Servants are dependent on their masters (Hiebert)- servanthood is not a negative thing, it is an interdependence and a relationship; humility
- Camarada- we should not serve creation, creation should serve us
- Van dyke and Silvius view it as a relationship
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR