Lesson on Finland
Today in Global Ethics class, Max also gave his lesson on Finland. Max's objective for this lesson was to inform us of the environment and environmental policies in Finland.
Max firstly gave us a very general overview of the environment in Finland. He then went into some detail about the information. The activity we participated in was to read an article on recycling in Finland and then tell the class one or two things we learned from the article. This activity helped us to get a better understanding of the amount of waste produced in Finland and the steps being taken to reduce this waste. This activity directed contributed to the overall objective of the lesson because it helped to clarify some of the more general points talked about in the lesson.
1. Critical Thinker and Problem Solver - I read the article and comprehended the information.
2. Effective Communicator - I shared what I drew from the article to the class effectively i.e. the class could understand what I was saying.
3. Person of High Character - I paid attention in class and was a good listener. This way, I was able to understand the information given.
Labels: global ethics
My Lesson on Denmark
Today I gave a lesson on my country of study, Denmark. The objective of my lesson was to give a class a general overview on Denmark, and discuss the concept of an ideal country.
The activities which I included in my lesson were 'jigsaw' and 'visual organizer'. For visual organizer, I had a keynote which contained all the facts I wanted to get across, and also a movie. For jigsaw, I assigned every student two pieces (and in some cases, one), on a time period in Danish history. I then asked the students to read the excerpt/s, become experts at their assigned piece, and then report back to the class in chronological order. The keynote helped me achieve my lesson objectives as it was an easy and attractive way of presenting the information. The jigsaw helped to achieve the lesson objectives as it was a more appealing and easy way for the students to learn about history, which sometimes can be considered boring. By sharing the load, the students do not feel as overwhelmed.
1. Critical Thinker and Problem Solver - The students had to read two passages and pick out the most important parts from these passages. Having the ability to do this is a very important skill for research.
2. Effective Communicator - After the students had read the passages, they were to present back to the class. The students were able to report back to the class on what they learned and in this process, also teach the class.
3. Community Contributor - The students participated in the discussion at the end and shared their thoughts. This was contributing to the community as the others in their class could learn about their views.
Labels: global ethics
Lesson on Austria
In Global Ethics class today, Kevin presented a lesson on Austria. The overall objective I took from this lesson was firstly, to learn some information about Austria, and then learn about the idea of xenophobia and its relation to other concepts.
Kevin firstly presented us with historical facts which would help us later on in the lesson. He also gave us some commonalities of these historical facts. We were then asked to do a quickwrite on a piece on xenophobia in Austria after reading an article. The quickwrite helped to achieve the objective of the lesson because firstly, it got us thinking, and secondly, it enabled us to gain a better understanding of the situation in Austria, and then come to our own conclusions and thoughts as to why this may be. After this, we argued some prompts which were related to the objective. This helped to achieve the objectives because it gave us the opportunity to use the historical facts that had been given and use them to form an effective argument.
HIS student outcomes
1. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: I wrote down my thoughts when we were given the information. I also used this information to argue prompts and ultimately, come to a conclusion.
2. Active Learning: I did my own research on the prompts given, and then made an argument based on this research.
3. Effective Communicator: I presented my argument for the prompt. I was able to define the terms, make an argument, support it with historical examples, and then finish with a conclusion.
Labels: global ethics
Governmental Systems in Ancient Greece
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
What was the governmental system in Ancient Greece? What do you think of this system?
Ancient Greece refers to the period of Greek history lasting from the Greek Dark Ages in 1100 BCE to the Roman conquest of Greece in 146 BCE The Ancient Greeks had many different types of governmental systems during this period. Plato wrote The Republic in approximately 380 BCE., so I will focus on the governmental systems before and around this time.
During the Dark Age, city-states developed in Greece. These were firstly ruled by kings, with advice from wealthy nobles. By about 750 BCE, the nobles had overthrown the kings to become the rulers. Many tyrants soon came to power in many Greek city-states as a result of revolutions. However, they were soon replaced by an oligarchy, in which a few wealthy citizens, instead of the nobility, ran the government.
In 594 BCE, a statesman named Solon reformed the laws by ending the practice of enslaving debtors, dividing citizens into classes by wealth, and defined the rights and duties of each class. He also wrote up a code of law. After Solon left office, civil war broke out, and in 560 BCE, a tyrant took control. In 508 BCE, Cleisthenes, another Athenian statesman, made Athens into a democracy. He extended voting rights to all free adult men and created a council of 500 members which was open to any citizen. This gave all citizens a chance to serve in the government.
During the 500's BCE, a lot of Greek city-states in Asia Minor were under the rule of the Persian Empire. Many of these city-states then rebelled against their Persian rulers. Although the Athenian army was outnumbered, it defeated the Persian army in 490 BCE at the Battle of Marathon. In 479 BCE, the Greek city-states defeated another Persian invasion.
During the 400s BCE, Athens reached its height of power and prosperity. The leading Athenian statesman at the time was called Pericles. Greece was at the center of culture in the Greek world, leading to what would be referred to as The Golden Age in 477 BCE.. The Golden Age, however, came to an abrupt end in 431 BCE with the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, a war between Athens and Sparta. During 430 BCE, a severe plague hit Athens; it killed approximately a third of its citizens, including Pericles. Athens then lacked able leaders during the rest of the war and finally surrendered.
Sparta's dominion lasted only a very short time before fighting among city states resumed. As a result of the continuing warfare, the quality of life declined, the economic conditions worsened, violent clashes between the rich and the poor became frequent, people grew less public spirited and more self centered, and the city-states lost their vitality.
I think the first form of government was not beneficial to the citizens. Many Greek farmers owned a very little amount of land, and had to borrow money between harvests to survive. When the farmers could not pay their loans, they lost their lands and were forced into slavery. The merchants and manufacturers had wanted a greater voice in government, but the nobility refused to share any power.
I think the next development of city-states run by tyrants, too, was not the best form of government. At first, the tyrants were able to help their followers. They distributed farmlands to the landless and found jobs for people working on large public building projects. However, the tyrants eventually grew more concerned with keeping their power than with helping the citizens.
I think a democracy is probably the best governmental system out of the ones I have stated above. The citizens had a voice in the government; people got to have a say in what their country, or in this case, state is doing. The Athenian democracy was the first democracy in the world and laid the foundations for many countries to follow.
Labels: global ethics
Baraka Reflection
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Baraka is a film that has no narrative, which focuses on the world through time-lapse photography and videos of nature and landscapes. This film was astoundingly beautiful. There were many different cultures that were portrayed in the film, from those in East to those in the West. The film also juxtaposes the chaotic pulse of human life in cities such as New York and Japan to the silence and tranquility in the natural world. The film had footage from all over the world combined with a very suitable soundtrack to each particular "section" of the film.
I think the movie is about the beauty of the world. The director chose to focus on the cinematography so that we, the audience, can see the simple splendor in everything around us. He also chose to film from all around the world, displaying the diversity of the world. We are living a very busy lifestyle, as portrayed in the particular chaotic "section" of the film, which ended with a man with a painted face screaming. We then, sweep directly into the next section of the film. In this section, the pace of the film and the soundtrack slows tremendously from the section before, giving us a feeling serenity. The director is telling us that although our lives are hectic, we should take a break and enjoy the world. He is also saying that there is still much unappreciated magnificence in the world; we just need to take the time to discover this within our environment.
Labels: global ethics
Parable for Ishmael
There was once a very rich and ambitious man. He had everything he could ever want. One day, he realized there was something he wanted which he did not already have. He realized he had yet to possess his very own city.
And so, the man set about building his own city. He built the most wonderful city there ever was. Railroad, banks, apartments, restaurants, parks, all the things one could ever want in a city. When the city was complete, he found people, and invited them to live in this wonderful city of his. The conditions were perfect. The economy was thriving, the people were happy, and no one could ask for anything more.
Then one day, something disrupted the perfect city. A building sunk into the ground. The man, however, was not worried. He simply said to himself, "Not to worry, I have enough money; I will build a new one in place of the old one." And so he did. Things were back to normal, and everyone was happy again.
And then, another building sunk into the ground. The man thought nothing of it, and built a new one in place of it. However, the buildings did not stop sinking. The buildings sunk one after the other and the man built and built and built. However, the man could not win. The buildings were disappearing into the ground much faster than he could build them. One day, the man woke in despair to find that all the buildings had gone. The city was no more.
The man wandered around his "city" in despair, wondering what had led to its collapse. He had hired the best company. He had used the best materials. He had maintained the excellent conditions of the buildings. He had... Suddenly, his foot sunk into the ground. The man looked down and saw that he was standing on nothing other than sand.
Labels: global ethics
Instinct Reflection
This film outdid my expectations. After a look at the film's
IMDB page prior to watching the film, I hadn't expected much. I think, however, you have to have read Ishmael to understand better what the film was about. I think the film was a good tie-in with Ishmael, but I preferred the book.
"It's the game. The game, Ethan. And I was so good at it. I made sure all the right people liked me. At night, I'd go through the checklist in my mind: Am I cool with Ben Hillard? Am I cool with Dr. Josephson? Am I cool with all the people who can help me? Am I cool with all the people who can hurt me? Nobody thought I was weak or a loser. There was nobody I was offending, nobody I loved. That game, Ethan. But guess what? You taught me how to live outside of the game. You taught me how to live. And you know what scares me even more? That I'm going back in."
I feel this part of the film was most powerful to me. I knew exactly what Theo was talking about. We spend all our lives trying to please the right people. No matter what we feel, no matter what we want, we put on this facade and pretend that we are fine with everything. We do the sort of things, and please the sorts of people that will get us places. We try our hardest not to offend anyone, and if we do, we apologize straight away. But what's most horrible is the fact that we have become so accustomed to this game that we cannot, we will not, live outside of it. For many of us, we don't even realize that we are playing this game...
I, too, want to learn how to live. I, too, want to learn how to live outside the rules, outside the game, outside the restrictions set upon me by both myself and society. I want to be able to experience freedom for myself, instead of vicariously.
Freedom is not a dream. Both the film and Ishmael give a very strong sense of hope at the end. There is some security in knowing that we can break free, tear down the bars, and save not only ourselves, but the world too. As Ishmael said, our task "is not to reach back but to reach forward."
Labels: global ethics
Reflection on Section 10 in Ishmael
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
"And every time the Takers stamp out a Leaver culture, a wisdom ultimately tested since the birth of mankind disappears from the world beyond recall, just as every time they stamp out a species of life, a life form ultimately tested since the birth of life disappears from the world beyond recall." (Ishmael)
This quote reminds me simultaneously of the Wade Davis and E.O. Wilson TED talks. It brings back the idea that the Leavers and other forms of life are quickly becoming extinct, and we, the Takers, aren't doing anything about it. In fact, we are the ones that are destroying them.
Takers are self-absorbed fools. All we seem to care about is the continuation of production of things that will lead to a better lifestyle. We only have knowledge of "what works well for production", but we lack the necessity of wisdom of "what works well for the people". Because of this, we destroy all other cultures and species, as they supposedly get in the way of our production. We do not realize that these Leavers are really the ones with the knowledge we lack, and that we have much to learn from them. Although we see that each Leaver culture has very specific knowledge as to what works for each of their respective cultures, their tastes, preference and vision of the world, they are still enacting the story which we are unable to enact, the one we should be enacting.
What makes us even bigger fools is the fact that although we don't know what works for us, we are not willing to find this solution. We are not willing to figure out what's best for us. We are not willing to take a look beyond our culture, to the past, to the Leaver culture, and figure out what it is that makes them successful in life, as to say. Instead we turn to prophets and lawgivers. These prophets and lawgivers give us the supposed
one right way to live. And we follow. We teach our children the same
. We do not realize that these prophets and lawgivers are like us, men, and people of the Taker culture. We do not realize that they too, have no idea as to what works for us. Instead, we follow blindly, for we cannot fathom the answer ourselves.
Driven by money, power, production, and the desire to conquer, we will not stop until we have destroyed the world, and everyone and everything else with it. We have been traveling down a path that has diverged from our past, the leavers. We have traveled much too far to look back and realize we took the wrong fork in the road, to even see the past. It's time to stop. It's time to realize that things are not going to work out for us, for the rest of the world, if we continue. We are destroying cultures, species, the earth. Is this a price we want to pay?
Labels: global ethics
Letter from Zimbabwe: The Destroyer
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
How does Mugabe seem to see himself in regards to the Tree of Knowledge?
"What does it matter that I'm weary of living as a murderer of all the life around me? I know good and evil, and this way of living is good. Therefore I must live this way even though I'm weary unto death, even though I destroy the world and even myself...I will grow without limit. To be limited is evil. I will steal the fire of life from the hands of the gods and heap it up for my growth, and that will be good. I will destroy those kinds that do not serve my growth, and that will be good...And because these things are good, they must be done at any cost. It may be that I'll destroy the garden and make a ruin of it...to grow without limit is good and to accept the limits of the law is evil...And if the groans of my progeny fill the air throughout the world, I will say to them, 'Your sufferings must be borne, for you suffer in the cause of good. See how great we have become! Wielding the knowledge of good and evil, we have made ourselves the masters of the world, and the gods have no power. Though your groans fill the air, isn't it sweeter to live in our own hands than in the hands of the gods?'" (Ishmael, page 163).
Robert Mugabe is the very essence of the Adam in the passage above. He has eaten off the Tree of Knowledge and deluded himself into thinking that he has the knowledge of what is good and what is evil. To him, whatever he can justify doing is good. It is because of this falsified belief that Zimbabwe is at the state it is now. The inflation rate of 11 million per cent, the desolate houses, the reeducation camps, the violence, the malnutrition and starvation, the HIV/AIDs rate, the low life expectancy rates, the black markets, the corruption, the bribery, the kleptocratic style of government are right, for Mugabe can justify his doing so. After being omnipotent for 28 years, Mugabe has become so engrossed in his vision and thirst for power that the killing and murdering and the people no longer matter; he has to continue to grow without limit. He has to wipe out everything that is in his way so that he may live with in his own hands, rather than the hands of the gods.
The vision of "empowerment", providing the people with the power to do something, was merely his excuse, his justification to do all the things he has done. It was merely a way to reach his goal of being the gods' equal, and living without limits. The schemes to benefit black "indigenous Zimbabweans" have been used by those in positions of authority and influence to benefit themselves. Mugabe and his circle are living an updated lifestyle of the whites that were driven away by Mugabe. This is rather ironic, and reminds me of the pigs in Animal Farm. Mugabe liberated his country from white colonists, yet he became like one himself. In his address to the United Nations General Assembly in New York, Mugabe said "Those who falsely accuse us of violations are themselves international perpetrators of genocide, acts of aggression, and mass destruction." To him, those who "falsely" accuse them are evil, for they do not serve his growth.
He is insatiable. He cannot and will not stop. He has to continue to grow. He knows what he is doing. He knows the state of his country. But to him, they are nothing. According to Paul Verryn, Mugabe hasn't "'lost it'...he knows exactly what he is doing...he's politcally astute, and he thinks this is the way you run a country." To him, these things are right. These things are good. He can and will pay any cost for growth, for power.
Indeed, Mugabe and his supporters believe that what he is doing is good. Zimbabwe and its people are no longer in the hands of the gods. Mugabe's nephew, Leo, said, "By 2010, we will be flying!" His supporters believe that Mugabe is their "own Moses". At the UN General Assemby address Mugabe said Zimbabweans were now "masters of their own destiny."
Mugabe and his country are spiralling downwards towards collapse and destruction because he is deluded in thinking he has the knowledge of good and evil. The gods had warned us. Now we can only hope that Mugabe will realize, or rather, admit that he has no such knowledge, and leave his, and his country's destinies to the gods. The same goes for the Takers, for on the day we eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, we were doomed to die. Now we can only hope that there is a way out of this, that there is a way to prevent us from devouring ourselves.
Click
here for the full New Yorker article on Robert Mugabe.
Labels: global ethics
E.O. Wilson Talk and Ishmael
"There may be the temptation to treat biosphere holistically and the species that compose it a great flux of identities hardly worth distinguishing one from the other, but each of these species, even the tiniest, are masterpieces of evolution. Each has persisted for thousands, even millions of years. Each has adapted exquisitely to the environment in which to live, interlocked with other species, to form the ecosystems upon which our own lives depend in ways we have not even begun to imagine. We will destroy these ecosystems and the species composing them at the peril of our own existence. And unfortunately, we are destroying them with ingenuity and ceaseless energy."
The connection between Ishmael and E.O. Wilson's TED talk is simply summed up by the excerpt above from Wilson's talk. Humans constantly place ourselves in the center of everything. We believe that the world was made for man, and man was made to conquer it. And so, we set out to conquer. We exterminate everything that we think will threaten our survival. We do not realize that everything plays a role in the world. We do not realize that if we destroy our ecosystem, we will not be able to live. We do not realize this, for maybe it is our nature not to realize. Or perhaps it is Mother Culture whispering in our ear, telling us that the world was made for humans, and humans alone.
We are much too proud to realize that our lives are dependent on things that are not under our control. Take for example, the 500 species of bacteria living symbiotically in each person's mouth and throat. These bacteria are necessary to each person's health as they hold off pathogenic bacteria. In our vanity, we do not explore the vast domain of hidden biodiversity. Why? Because there is no need to. We believe that in no way are these tiny organisms related to us.
Instead, we choose to destroy these species. We believe that man is set out to conquer, and achieve glory. Hobbes believed that the nature of man is comprised of competition, diffidence and glory. We conquer for gain. We conquer for safety. And lastly, we conquer for reputation. Humans are so set on what we believe is our destiny, and our survival, that we will do anything to make sure we achieve our goal and fulfill our destiny. We don't realize the harm we are causing to the world and the other species of the world.
Our ethnosphere is disappearing, our biosphere is disappearing, our world is falling apart. What we do not realize is that man is a part of the world. We exempt ourselves from the laws of life. So we do not see that with the collapse of the world, man will follow. We do not realize that it is "the law that fosters life for all - life for the grasses, life for the grasshopper that feeds on the grasses, life for the quail that feeds on the grasshopper, life for the fox that feeds on the quail, life for the crows that feeds on the dead fox," or that it is the law that has been followed for centuries by all the living organisms.
We need only to look at the concept of the A, B, C society to see interconnectedness. The As depend on the Bs, the Bs depend on the Cs, and the Cs depend on the As. The same can be applied to the human world. Everyone, and everything is interconnected on some level. Humans just don't realize it, and so we set about destroying the Bs and the Cs of the world (Of course humans consider themselves the As, for A comes first) without any thought for the consequences.
We are free-falling, experiencing the thrill of freedom of air, without the realization of what is to come, and, as Wilson said, "flying blind into our environmental future."
Labels: global ethics
Laws for Building Civilizations
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
I think firstly that man is unaware of these laws. However, it is not to say that we have not been warned. We need only to look in history to see civilizations passed, civilizations that have collapsed. Man is too ignorant and naive for his own good. And in some ways, we are too vain. We think that we can conquer everything.
We can only look so far ahead of us. We are exhilarated by the freedom of air during our flight. We can see that the ground is rising towards us, but we can't see further than that. We can't see that it is going to keep rising. We choose to live in the moment. We don't consider the future. We don't consider consequences. All we care about is now, the thrill of this freedom of air, and the marvels that come with it. We can't see that at the rate we are going, the world is going to be deplete of all its resources, and our civilization will collapse.
We can only look so far behind us. By looking back at our recent history, we see all the wonderful achievements we have made, and we therefore assume that we will continue this trend. We think that all we need to do is continue what we are doing, perhaps work a little harder, pedal a little faster, and all will be well. We will continue to conquer, to achieve great things, to enjoy the freedom of air. Soon, man will rule the universe.
We refuse to look further, either forwards or backwards. Maybe it is because we simply can't see so far. Maybe it is a deliberate attempt to ignore the past and the pending. Humans are afraid of what they don't know. So maybe we don't want to see what's coming because we are afraid. Maybe we want to outwit fate, to prove that we can conquer everything. Or maybe it is Mother Culture, whispering in our ears, telling us that everything will be fine. Things have been fine with the way we have been doing things, why then, do we need to start changing?
I have never considered that there be a law for building civilizations, or about how to live, but now, I am just worried for us humans. I hope that we can realize what we are doing, and that we can't wait anymore. Things are going to get worse, and they are going to get worse at an accelerating rate. I hope that we realize there is no way we can defy a law, no matter how hard we try. I hope we realize that if we don't do something now, our civilization is doomed.
Labels: global ethics
The world was created for us
I am a cat. The world was created for us. We have an account of how we came to be, but it certainly is no myth. We are very rational and incredibly intelligent. We accept only ideas that are proven by indisputable evidence.
About ten or fifteen billion years ago, the universe was created. Then our solar system was created about two or three billion years ago. Nothing happened for a long time. Then after a billion years or so, life appeared on Earth. At first, it was microorganisms and bacteria. Microorganisms evolved into higher and more complex forms. Evolution continued. More and more complex forms were created. Life spread to the land and evolved into amphibians. Amphibians evolved into reptiles. Reptiles evolved into mammals. And then, the cat appeared!
The universe was obviously created for us. The Earth revolves around us. Night was created for us, so that we may prowl and explore. Land was created for us, so we could live on it. Trees were created for us, so that we could climb and perch on them. The sea was created for us, so that fish we feed off could thrive in it. Mice, birds and other animals were created for us, so that we could entertain ourselves by chasing, hunting and feeding off them.
We are the most advanced race. Humans may think that they are more advanced than us, but in Ancient Egypt, cats were widely worshiped as a cult. To them, we were and still are, a symbol of grace and poise. We were also mummified to the same degree as humans. Humans have also done their part to create a lot of things for us. Cat food was created so that we could enjoy eating it. High buildings were built so we could jump off them. Wool and string were created so we could play with them. This is only to name a few; a lot of human-made things were created for us because we are so important.
Not only are we advanced, we are also a diverse race. We are spread all over the world, from the lions in the jungles of Africa to the cats that live with humans in cities. The cats that live with the humans choose to do it. We are not enslaved in any way by the humans. We can leave them any time we want. We live with them simply because they entertain us or we enjoy their company. In this way, humans were created for us too.
Evolution stopped once it reached the cat. There is nothing more to come. Things that are made after our creation are merely things that were created for us, to help fill various aspects of our lives such as food, shelter, entertainment and so on. We are the center of the world; there is no evidence that disproves this.
Labels: global ethics
Ethical and Social Rules
Friday, September 19, 2008
How do we become conscious of the ethical and social rules in our societies?
Are humans born inherently good or evil? If we are born good, then straight from the beginning, we would always do what is right. We would not defy the ethical and social rules; we would act according to them. I would like to believe that humans are born good. I don't think, however, that I have really given this idea enough thought and decided on an answer to be able to write about it, so I will approach this question another way.
One could say that we are born neither good or evil. It is later in life that we make these decisions, decisions that will change the way we go about the rest of our lives. When we are born, we do not have a sense of right and wrong. We do not know what defines right, or what defines wrong, or why there is even such a thing as right and wrong in the first place. I think we become conscious of the ethical and social rules in our societies by external factors, such as through experiences and what we are taught.
When we are young, we are taught what is right and wrong because we are unable to see the difference between them. We generally accept what we are taught, once again, because we are too young to question authority. However, as we grow older, we may begin to question what the adults have taught us; we may decide that we want to make these decisions for ourselves (generally when people are in their teenage years). This means, we try things. We try things that we have been taught as "wrong", just to see what would happen, what it would feel like and what the consequences will be. Through experiences such as these, we would then know that we can do things that are wrong, but we would probably feel an overwhelming sense of guilt and would have to face the consequences of our actions. However, once again, the idea of "Are humans born inherently good or evil?" is brought up here. If a person is born inherently evil, they may not feel guilt for doing something "wrong" and continue doing it.
Through experience, we become conscious the ethical and social rules the hard way, but it is this way that is probably the most effective. As we grow up, we also become exposed to the harsh reality of the world. We become more experienced to a point where we can develop a common sense; and do what is right to lead a good life.
However, I have often pondered why there is a good and bad in the first place. What defines good and bad? Why is killing a bad thing? Most of us despise killing, and this sentiment in some ways, prevents most of us from committing this crime. Is there some sort of proof that killing is bad? How do we characterize the actions that are bad from those that are good? Is there proof that killing is a bad thing? Maybe we don't become conscious of ethical and social rules afterall. Maybe having ethical and moral knowledge is impossible...
Labels: global ethics
Reflection on Borges and Davis Talks
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
In Global Ethics class, we watched two TED talks. One by Phil Borges called Documenting our Endangered Cultures and the other by Wade Davis called The Worldwide Web of Belief and Ritual. I will focus mainly on the talk by Wade Davis because it appealed to me more.
Both Borges' and Davis' talks were about endangered cultures and the disappearance of our ethnosphere. Borges talked about a program that links indigenous kids with the US kids in order to expand the insular views of the US. Davis talked about a myriad of different cultures and their viewpoints on life, the purpose of life and providing possible answers to the fundamental question, "What does it mean to be human and alive?"
The different cultures Davis spoke about really intrigued me. For I had heard of some of these cultures before, yet I had never really taken the time to understand their philosophy, or their outlook on life. Davis, in his talk, using only a few examples of different indigenous cultures, really struck me. I began to discern, and understand the different views of the world. I had never given much thought to the different cultures of the world for I was ignorant and selfish. Growing up in a so-called "advanced" society, I thought of nothing but myself. I did not know much about cultures other than our own; I did not care for cultures other than our own. I had a vague understanding for different cultures, but I had never thought them important enough to pay attention to. But after listening to this talk, my eyes were opened. I was, and people like the "old" me are, the reason that these amazing cultures are disappearing, unknown and unappreciated.
Some believe that we are all brothers and sisters. As Davis put it, "All people are merely cultural options, different visions of life itself." This brings up the idea that different peoples and societies choose to pursue different things. For example, in the west, we choose to pursue technology; we choose to advance our race. However, some indigenous people choose not to pursue such technology or advancement, rather, they spend their time in nature, appreciating its beauty. We chose to pursue knowledge that will put us out into space, while the Polynesians chose to pursue knowledge of the sea. We all began the same; we just made different decisions that led us towards separate paths. Who are we to judge these indigenous people if we are all interrelated?
We made our choice, and in the same way, they made theirs. Just because they chose to pursue things different than our own, we think of them as inferior and "unadvanced". This is such a falsified belief. When you strip us down, back to where we started, we are all the same. We all feel, we all go through life, wondering and searching for our purpose. We just chose different ways to find the answer to this question, subsequently creating different cultures. We are but a small part in the world. We may consider ourselves advanced but what about the indigenous people? They are, in their own way, advanced also. They just chose to pursue different aspects of life, aspects of life we have neglected. We see these people as primitive and inferior but we do not even consider that they do not do the same to us. Some of them even pray for us, we who have harmed our world. They forgive us for our wrongdoings to them and the world. But we are so vain and ignorant as a people that we do not understand that they too, deserve respect. Davis said that these cultures are not "failed attempts at being us or being modern." Rather, we should take on the perspective that they are just unique answers to the question of what does it mean to be human and alive?
Every two weeks, a language becomes extinct. Of the 6000 languages spoken in the world, only 3000 are taught to children. The world is losing its diversity. Cultures are either being assimilated or lost completely. We are losing what makes us a world.
In the end, it all comes down to choice. Our choice to pursue advancement, knowledge and technology has led us to where we are today. The indigenuous people's choice to pursue things different to us has led to the diversity in the world. We may choose to continue living the way we are, unaware of the dying ethnosphere. We may choose to learn, understand and appreciate cultures we have never heard of before. We may choose to think of the indigenous people of the world as inferior and primitive. We may choose to see them as our equals, and learn from them. Every choice leads us towards a different road, a different journey for us to travel. There is a way, a way to treasure the diversity in the world and it starts now. We need to begin to take small steps in humbling ourselves. We need to go back to the beginning, to the time when we were all the same. We need to go back to this time and learn. We need to learn from these cultures, not only that, we need to learn to help preserve these cultures. They are what makes our world the way it is, a rich tapestry.
Labels: global ethics
What aspects of human life over the past several thousand years could be likened to a gorilla going from a forest to a zoo?
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Unknown to many of us, human life is bound by many limitations. Both limitations brought about by society and limitations that were brought about by ourselves. In this age, our minds and subsequently our speech and actions are controlled by factors unknown to us.
Before civilization came about, there was just man and nature. The man could live freely, as nature does not expect any favours from him, or any actions that he has to abide by. Man could do whatever he pleased for he has no need or desire to please others or nature. Man's mind was free to wander into the depths and realms that had yet to be discovered.
I am not critiquing religion or its principles but by putting our faith into God, or any other form of religious idol, we automatically snap ourselves into the grid of religious laws and principles. Unlike nature, religion has expectations of us. Using Christianity as an example, the first and foremost of these expectations is faith; we need to blindly put our faith into God and his existence. The other expectations then follow, such as the ten commandments, and following Jesus' teachings in the New Testament. We believe in God, therefore we must do what he expects of us. Religion constrains us, in order for us to live a life of good. Choosing to put our faith in God is like choosing to put ourselves into an invisible cage which limits what we do and think.
In the beginning, it was man and nature. Nowadays, it is society. Although it may seem so, we are never alone, and we are not entirely free. In accordance with Michael Foucalt's theory of Panopticism - the idea of behaviour control through constant surveillance, our behaviour will be influenced by the constant surveillance, much like in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. In this sense, our behaviour is influenced by society. Society, in this case, is the surveillance, exerting control over us. Society, like religion, expects many things from us. In our postmodern world, we are actually constantly controlled by the power of society. We are not free; in order to fit in, we have to 'please' society by following its laws and expectations. Man had created society in order to feel a sense of belonging and security, however, with its creation, we lost our free will and individualism.
Technology is also another aspect of human life that can be likened to a gorilla going from a forest to a zoo. In the past, we did not have technology, however, with the advancement of the human race, we created technology. Nowadays we are heavily reliant on technology, in fact, it would be extremely difficult for us to survive without it. Technology holds an extremely strong power over us and continues to do so. With this, the question of whether one day the costs of technology will outdo the benefits and lead to mankind's ultimate destruction has been raised.
Maybe it was time we took a break from these limitations. Maybe it was time we questioned whether we are truly free, and if we really want to be.
"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived." - Henry David Thoreau
Labels: global ethics
What choices have led to our current global situation?
The current global situation can be interpreted as good or bad, depending on the person and their belief. One may choose to believe that our situation is really good, the best that it has been in centuries. We are making new discoveries each day, we are aware of the importance of knowledge, we have succeeded and are continuing to succeed in advancing the human race. However, one may choose to believe that our situation is disastrous and we need to take action immediately. In an effort to advance our race, we have harmed nature and the Earth in the process. Global warming, climate change, and pollution are only some of the issues facing the world today.
Speaking in a more specific sense, each person has made their fair amount of choices which have led us to where we are today. We may choose to litter, or we may choose to put the rubbish in the bin. We may choose to throw everything out, or we may choose to recycle. We may choose to drive our cars for convenience, or we may choose to walk or use public transportation. We may choose to leave the water running, or we may choose to turn off all unused taps. These choices all, in some way, affect and change the global situation.
With every choice, there is a benefit, and a cost. The good and the bad are complements, it is not possible to have one without the other, and it is ultimately up to us to choose how far we are willing to risk the well-being of earth and nature to achieve our goals.
Labels: global ethics
