Well said, Steven Bissell. The essential point of how a mountain "thinks" (a
metaphor, of course) is that it happens over geological time, not human
time. Actually, perhaps that would be "ecological time," a shorter spectrum
than geo- but far longer than human.
-Tc
Anthony R. S. Chiaviello, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Professional Writing
Department of English
University of Houston-Downtown
One Main Street
Houston, TX 77002-0001
713.221.8520 / 713.868.3979
"Question Reality"
> ----------
> From: Steven Bissell[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 10:13 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Ethical implications of environmental change - why the
> Manichaen thesis?
>
> Thinking like a mountain
>
> Lisa asks:
> That's my favorite quote by Aldo! I was wondering what your
> meaning of it was? I have heard different impressions. of what it meant.
>
>
> Really good question Lisa, so good in fact I think I'll steal it and ask
> my
> grad students.
>
> This quote seems to crop up about as often as "fierce green fire" from the
> same essay. I have seen both of them in many context over the years, but
> my
> own opinion about them is that this section of SCL (Sketches Here and
> There)
> is intended to take the simple ecology lessons from Section I (A Sand
> County
> Almanac) and prepare the argument in Section III (The Upshot). That
> argument
> being that evolutionary and ecological "facts" can open our thinking to an
> extension of ethics to the natural world. The idea of "Thinking like a
> mountain" seems to mean that short-term, non-evolutionary time is too
> short
> to make an accurate appraisal of issues for ethical decision making. It is
> necessary to take a much longer view of events in order to see all of the
> ethical issues.
>
> For example, the last essay in that section is "Escudilla," which is the
> name of a mountain. Like "Thinking Like a Mountain" is concerns predator
> control, in this case a grizzly bear. One of the interesting things about
> these essays is that it is where Leopold specifically stated his lost
> faith
> in predator control. The last part of that essay specifically states that
> all involved in the decision to kill the bear were taking a very short
> view.
> And, IMO, the literary value of this essay is more powerful than "Thinking
> like a mountain."
>
> "Since the beginning, time had gnawed at the basaltic hulk of
> Escudilla,
> wasting, waiting, and building. Time built three things on the old
> mountain,
> a venerable aspect, a community of minor animals and plants, and a
> grizzly.
> The government trapper who took the grizzly knew he had made
> Escudilla safe
> for cows. He did not know he had toppled the spire off an edifice
> a-building
> since the morning stars sang together. (and so on)"
>
> I do not think, as I've seen in some publications, that Leopold was
> speaking
> in any sort of metaphysical sense. I think by this time in his life
> Leopold
> had little or no ideas about pantheism or mystical things at work. He was
> through and through an evolutionary ecologist and wanted to convey the
> messages of ecology and evolution to the public in such a way as to show
> that they could have ethical importance. Nor do I think that Leopold meant
> that one had to go to the mountains to absorb some sort of existential
> experience in order to appreciate nature. While Leopold deplored the
> destruction of 'wild' areas, as evidence by the first essay in this
> section
> (On Top), I think that the overall point was not a sentimental one, but a
> pragmatic one.
>
> Anyway, my view on the quote, thanks for asking.
>
> Steven
>
> "Our human ecology is that of a rare species of mammal in a social,
> omnivorous niche. Our demography is one of a slow-breeding, large,
> intelligent primate. To shatter our population structure, to become
> abundant
> in the way of rodents, not only destroys our ecological relations with the
> rest of nature, it sets the stage for our mass insanity."
> Paul Shepard
>
|