John wrote :

>Maybe the street theatre really is tragicomedy. But forest destruction is
>not comedy for sloths, and Gorrillas in the Mist. I think the film about
>Diane Fossey, Gorillas in the Mist, was very powerful and should be required
>viewed as part of the environmental ethics program in any course level work
>in ethics. Environmental tragedies are not primarily about a clash between
>ideologies but are often about a clash of feelings and values, say the value
>of the organism such as the Gorilla and the value of money to feed babies.
>Where is the ideology involved in someone valuing food for the babies and
>children, and the value of the species for the forest and for their selves?

The ideology figures in the series of events which preceded such a sorry set
of circumstances, e.g. colonialism, imperialism, intervention by capitalist
entrepreneurs, missionaries, arms salesmen, Western medical techniques, etc.

>I read much of 'The Praise of Folly' by Erasmus. He was lucky to live to an
>old age. One thing that impressed me was the simple piety that I read about
>in many of his shorter stories about common people. Having a simple faith
>resulting from acts of charity rather than more calculated or programmed
>exstacies puts the heart in the right place.
>
>Erich From was famous for quoting the statement by Jeremiah in which
>Jeremiah says:
>
>"Eye hath not seen, nor has it been prepared for in the heart of man, the
>things that are too come."
>
>When a person has no faith, has lost all hope, then there is a profound
>realization that the only thing that can save them or the one they love is
>charity. When I was watching Vision International I was very moved by the
>look of the poor, and found some tears in my eyes. I figured that the poor,
>miserable persons must have lost hope to be that bad off. The only thing
>that can save some of the them of course is someone moved by their tears of
>sorrow.

Okay. So what happens when you've lost all hope ?...and still receive 
no charity ?
Where do you go from there, I mean spritually, if it is very clear 
that there will
never be sufficient charity ( spiritual, not financial ) to go around 
? If your back
is to the wall, how does it feel to have to beg for charity, and 
still receive none ?
Where else is there to go after that ?

>Without charity there is no hope and there is no faith. Faith and hope come
>later, or before. To have lost all hope is to feel nothing any longer; it is
>grief.

I would define grief rather differently, more as loss, as bereavement. I think
a person can recover from grief, in a way analogous to recovering from a
physical wound. It changes you, and you may never be fully 'uninjured',
but I think it is a very natural, even inevitable experience. But to return
to faith, hope and charity. I know it is possible to lose all of these...but
do you end up with nothing ? I mean, there is still suffering, isn't there,
and that's something. And there is the person who endures the experience.
When the suffering becomes very extreme, then the person begins to
disintegrate and collapse. And then what remains ?

>Sometimes it is that way for all kinds of terrible things that happen:
>forest destruction, etc. When it finally happens and you have to resolve
>yourself to the destruction, you know there is no longer any hope left. How
>can there be any hope left after the forest is completely denuded with only
>charred stumps remaining? The forest that you tried to save is altered for
>all time, or nearly. After it is gone you don't feel any more for the forest
>and you don't feel the same concern.

Yes. It seems quite similar to returning to one's village to find the homes
all burned and the occupants murdered or fled. An act of brutality. I think
that kind of experience does produce numbness, grief, despair, but also
can produce anger and desire for revenge, or a steely determination to
resist those who perpetrate such atrocities.

>How many foresters have I heard say they can simple recreate the ancient
>forests, but first lets us log them? Too many. It seems that there must be
>some middle way. Perhaps sensitization to the issues and concerns of
>environmentalists and conservationists? What is the answer here?

We have to shift the culture. We have to move the values and standards
that we have inherited, and replace them with new ones which have a
respect for nature built in a priori...and we have to do it quickly, not
over two or three generations. And we have to do it in the face of a
multi billion dollar mega-machine which resists any changes and
which promotes destruction as hard as it can...we'll probably lose, but
at least we will have tried. What other choice is there ? Just roll over
and die in despair ?
I tried that "-) take my word for it, it ain't no answer...and it's boring.
As tk said, love and rage.

<good stuff about forest management snipped>

C.L.





%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%