Maria Stella wrote :
> I have to appologise for confusing the writers, the Red Queen is
> definitely NOT written by Dawkins, no wonder why i did not have any
> replies!
>
> By the way i have to say that i only file your conversation now, as after
> some point i was not sure about its real purpose (that was in the
> discussion on if it is ethical to deprive a predator from
> the joy of devouring its victim for recreation purposes):
> this was just too 'western' study approach for me to accept as ethical!
> was it ethical to JUST talk about ethics like we talk about sports?
> was it ethical to close ehics in a safe academic drawer? any sincere
> politics anywhere? any "applied ethics" paradigms?
I must have missed your Red Queen post. I've heard of the book, but
not read it.
I'm not altogether clear what you're asking. I do myself get quite
impatient with discussions of the ' how many angels can sit on a pin
head' variety, when all around the environment seems to be metaphorically
burning.
I have been involved with the management of an ancient woodland nature
reserve. I wish I knew an over-riding environmental ethic to turn to for
guidance.
Every person involved had their own lobbying position. Entomologists
wanted changes to favour insects, bird enthusiasts wanted different
changes to favour birds, some wanted access for disabled people,
some wanted changes so the timber could be exploited to raise money,
some wanted changes on aesthetic grounds, to make the scenery pretty,
some wanted changes on health and safety grounds, in case a rotten tree
fell on a walker,some wanted all non-native species eradicated - what's
non-native ? impossible to define really. Anything that hadn't made it across
from Europe before the English Channel formed....that's pretty arbitrary.
Some wanted to allow local farmers in to hunt, some wanted well-maintained
paths, others wanted no paths, leave it 'natural', but how can anything in
forest that has been changed every year by human activity, for several
thousand years, be called 'natural' ?
In practice, the whole project was / is just a muddle, with what happens
depending upon who happens to turn up at a committee, whose got the
strongest personality, who happens to actually work to get the changes
realised, and a host of other incidental factors.
The experience has turned me right off the 'wise stewardship' idea, because
it needs wisdom, and that's in short supply.
Chris.
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~chrislees/tao.index.html
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|