After reading the article on "Saving nature, but only for man" by Charles Krauthammer, i cant help but to get this impression that the author is trying to tell us that we should freely exploit the earth's resources regardless of the aftermath it might bring.
By using the survival of man as its means of justification, like "the livelihood for for 30,000 logging families"(Charles,K. , 2000), Charles is trying to say that logging is the right thing to do, but without a forest to begin with, there's nothing to log! The fact is due to global warming, forest fires and logging, major forests are being reduced to plains. If the situation continues, not only the owls but even humans will be in danger. As trees play a vital rule in reducing CO2, a catalyst to greenhouse effect. Just image, if all major forest were really to be logged, not only the owls but we will be in danger due to the greenhouse effect.
Although i believe Charles has the intentions of people in mind but i don't think i can totally agree with his view of things. The fact is people are simply borrowing the world and not returning. If is continues, we will eventually find ourselves living on scorched earth.(think of the movie "the chronicles of raddick") We must not forget that nature is not something some could just create. As we borrow form our earth we must not forget to return.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By using the survival of man as its means of justification, like "the livelihood for for 30,000 logging families"(Charles,K. , 2000), Charles is trying to say that logging is the right thing to do, but without a forest to begin with, there's nothing to log! The fact is due to global warming, forest fires and logging, major forests are being reduced to plains. If the situation continues, not only the owls but even humans will be in danger. As trees play a vital rule in reducing CO2, a catalyst to greenhouse effect. Just image, if all major forest were really to be logged, not only the owls but we will be in danger due to the greenhouse effect.
Although i believe Charles has the intentions of people in mind but i don't think i can totally agree with his view of things. The fact is people are simply borrowing the world and not returning. If is continues, we will eventually find ourselves living on scorched earth.(think of the movie "the chronicles of raddick") We must not forget that nature is not something some could just create. As we borrow form our earth we must not forget to return.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Charles,K. (n.d). Saving Nature, But Only for Man. Handout given by Brad,B
3 comments:
Although I haven't read this article, I have the same opinion with you. Human must pay back to the earth for the fault our anicents make.
"The fact is people are simply borrowing the world and not returning."
This sentence makes me feel that human beings are still in primitive or uncivillized time. Although, we are seemed to be living in a modern world but lots of things that we did were worse than those ancient people.
I agree with your phrase "The fact is people are simply borrowing the world and not returning". We might have been exploiting the world too much. Perhaps it is the time for us to think again and start repaying the world for the hospitality she had offered us. And it should start from us individuals.
Post a Comment