Mobilization as Active Participation

The environment as we know it thus far, is not only changing, but is constantly involved in change, regardless of our recognition of it; the language in which we discuss this change is important to the overall nature of the direction this conversation takes moving forward. The fact that we know that we enact change in the environment should be reason enough, for our stewardship of said environment; yet nonetheless, scientific data recognizes this “rising temperatures, sea level rise, and changes in extreme events are expected to increasingly disrupt and damage critical infrastructure and property, labor productivity, and the vitality of our communities” as some evidence. (IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Group...) Our actions are becoming critical in an increasing manner, showing that the individual influence we have over the immediate communities is vital, including the actions of ​individual​ corporations/institutions/organizations wherein, they set precedent for the future of not only understanding climate and its’ dynamic nature​, n​ o pun intended, but our place in nature as we continue to live in accordance with it. At this point, the future of environmental ethics is not in gathering concrete anthropogenic evidence regarding influence on nature nor the authoritarian response to the eminent danger of a shifting climate, but in our selective adaptation to this danger. (Morton, Timothy. The Ecological Thought)

Human mentality begins the conversation, because we possess the means of how to. We have mentality regarding who we are and what kind of influence we have over the world around us, as actual individuals, and the individual overall creature we maintain in the ecological community. In light of this individual nature the conversation thus becomes broad in the sense that we are forced to recognize not only our sense of morality, understanding, and reason – or rationality – as we like to call it, but must regard ourselves to the standards of active participation that our new thinking with regard of the ecological community requires. As we grow our conversation about ecology, the definition of ecology in turn must grow alongside that of the environment, and communities. Inclusivity will increase for the better of all individuals within [our community], ourselves aside, in order to continue setting precedent for the ways in which we continue this growth. The juxtaposition of generalizations and specifications regarding the individual creatures and the environment as a whole becomes the most important aspect of understanding the ethics of environmentalism.

In our research, we cross examine Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, and Marx’s, ideologies regarding autonomy and freedom in order to dissect moral character and realize that counter to the general belief, we are not alone in morality – our participation in the concept of morality is significant to ecological cooperation and the aforementioned participation. Morton states, “The Ecological Thought is thinking about interconnectedness. The ecological thought is a thought about ecology, but also a thinking that is ecological. Thinking the ecological thought is part of an ecological project.” (Pg. 7, Morton, Timothy.) This definition is essential to the overall process in which my work will attempt to identify, because my own philosophy identifies with thinking ecologically. Morton describes this process as persistent and pervasive. and to the upmost degree of these definitions, I agree – those that allow for themselves to inhabit this thought process, ​like I have​, will also agree. It may be safe to assume that through a Darwinian perspective, this change in mentality,

would be addressed as an adaptation. This adaptation ought to be in accordance with any community that one finds themselves a part of, and thus persuaded by the facts of biological sciences and study. For example, introductory Biology classes will require a basic understanding of food webs – a tool that illustrates the feeding relationships among species within a community, revealing species interactions and community structures (Hui, Dafeng) – showcasing interconnectedness, or the “co-existentialism” as Morton exemplifies in his work. Co-existentialism is a building point for the understanding of ecological thought, because the basis of inter-dependency and connectedness are too, extremely important in our ecological community. (Ch. 1, Morton, Timothy.) These daily interactions within a community, a biosphere, an ecosystem, a planet, universe, or greater are built into existence yet, our particular actions as an individual species within this community lack the recognition of this co-existentialism, reverting to a nature more primitive than our technological means. Thus, we are given responsibility in looking toward the future to not only recognize the flux of the natural world but our place within it, our new active mentality regarding the world we live in, and focus to create an active participation with special regard to capitalism, art, technology, science, and but of course, philosophy.

"For Rousseau however, reason, is not at all a part of the natural order, so that, 'if you understand clearly that man is active in his judgements, that his intelligence is only the power to compare and judge, you will see that his freedom is only a similar power derived from this;... the determining cause [of his judgment and volition] is in himself.’

Thus, a rational action follows the dictates of human spontaneity and "what [a man] does freely is no part of a system marked out by Providence (Chance or luck) and it cannot be imputed to Providence.’" (pg. 243, Rapaczyński, Andrzej)

In reflection of the above quotation from the analysis of Rousseau, there is an aspect of human-specific intrinsic value, yet this value in trying to assert the extent of human freedoms, requires a generalization that we find useful in Environmental Ethics. Usefulness of the political agenda for philosophy is found within the United States’ politics’ and sets a precedent similar to roots of democracy found in ancient Athens or Greece. In the above, the reason used by Rousseau for the establishing of freedoms, for ​human​ Beings, is set in accordance with judgment and comparison, which lack essential human subjectivity. In Rousseau’s consideration that ‘freedom is the right direction’ in terms of morality, the argument to be made is that, ‘In what basis should we allow humans to impede on the freedom of the Beings around us?’ – ​Beings used as the umbrella term for active participants of the ecological web of interaction. We have been busy or distracted if you will, conducting our own freedom via capitalistic means and in turn, impede on the freedoms of the Beings around us. This is the issue that environmental ethics, once again, determines is central. In this case, my argument is implying that my own [and your] agency ought to be basis for being a shepherd for the freedom of the Beings around you [and I].

The Christian perspective maintains some usefulness here in the allegory of ‘Adam and Eve’ – whose freedom granted all possibility for choice within a garden. Humans were granted their own freedom to do as they wish and decide their own fate, with the only rule being to avoid a forbidden fruit, of which they will maintain knowledge of both good and evil. In choosing to eat the fruit, as a collective, ‘Adam and Eve’ become knowledgeable of their humanity. (Bible: The Old Testament) ‘Adam and Eve’ are not individuals, but an adaptation of knowledge in humanity that therefore creates a belief that in some way, ​human​ Beings maintain difference from the world around us, of which we are not because we are derived from it. In comparison to Rousseau, our freedom [of the mind] led us to this point where we once again must utilize this freedom – or have we already done so? Our freedom either marginalizes ourselves as individuals of the ecological community ​or w​ e choose to account for ourselves as members of the ecological community. Our attempt in this paper, is to defend the latter.

To become a member of this community, we recognize but not dwell on the past, similar to the ethics that Jiddu Krishnamurti would present. (Krishnamurti, Jiddu) We, as an individual human​ Being species must recognize what our past has done to the ecological community and move forward. This is essential to holding ourselves accountable in order to conduct ourselves as a truly active participant within this community. Active participation within the community, our selves now at the bottom of the ecological ‘totem pole’ [at least in terms of participating] becomes the basis of intrinsic value because of its generality. In Being, the act of ​being a​ live now becomes a phrase to be toyed and manipulated as we maneuver our definitions and understanding of our own Being and the active participants that will soon arise in the future and of course, in active participation, must be accounted for.

“Climate change – the result of about two hundred years of human industry – could change the Earth for thousands of years...” (pg. 131, Morton, Timothy) “...the end of the world has already happened. We sprayed the DDT. We exploded the nuclear bombs. We changed the climate. This is what it looks like after the end of the world.” (pg. 98, Morton, Timothy)

Living in the present during the introduction of the anthropocentric extinction [the sixth mass extinction event], should once again, be reason enough for our stewardship of this ecological community, but nonetheless, further persuasion is required. Vice news conducted a documentary regarding a Toxic Chemical Valley in Canada, of which, in our opinion is an important example of the beginning of the future in a world of which we must take responsibility/accountability for. In this chemical valley, marginalized communities, of primarily Native American decent, were supremely affected by the pollution caused by refining mass amounts of petroleum in this area. In turn, this community in particular, alongside the neighboring towns were subject to high rates of mutational illnesses, like cancers. (Mcguire, Patrick and Rafael Katigbak) This community had no control over the levels of pollution they were exposed to, the amount of which they were exposed, or of these major industrial corporations/organizations/institutions knowledge regarding what substances would be released into neighboring communities. This seems to mirror the lives of various non-​human​ Beings of whom are not only affected, but disrupted and in a worst-case scenario, eradicated from the overall community.

As Immanuel Kant would ask in his Deontology, where does our duty fall considering being at the forefront of causing catastrophic events like the above, with regards to Beings who lack said control [​human​ or non-​human​]? The answer we have gathered is within inclusivity.

This action is new common ground.The notion of active participation is something that previously has been mentioned a lot – elaborating on this we find that our action comes by interesting measure. This measure seems to be counterintuitive to what one would believe because it is a direct opposite of the notion, active participation. As one of the largest contributors to the actions thus far within this ecological community, the only future of this community will be found within a sense of passive regard for said community. This passive regard means to allow ourselves to continue our actions – the shaping of our own reason/understanding/rationality, or morality must stem from within. In many areas of modern ethics, especially in the Ethics of Care, as discussed in this current Phil 120: Introduction to Ethics class there is importance placed on precedent. Precedent in particular has had mass influence on notions of the human experience, sadly for the worse so far, considering violence as it is portrayed in the media, sexuality [mostly in regards, to women but also how men view women], and violence. The prior’s induction into the human psyche was done ignorant of its’ repercussion, but living in a world where we know that media, popular culture, cultural and communal inter- and intra- actions have influence, should we adjust our mentality? Should we utilize the same tools that we have been forced to reprimand? Do we thus fight, in a sense, fire with fire?

In the last chapter of Morton’s book, The Cultural Logic of Early Environmentalism, the boundaries set regarding art are too, expanded in definition and we consider aspects of influence within experience. (Morton, Timothy) The activeness of the participant with art is excitement of the emotion, but nonetheless done in a passive sense because there is no action, simply reaction. In the future of the environment, with regard to art, philosophy, science, and technology there must be mobility [possibly like that presented to Congress in 2019, as the Green New Deal] to the scale of first nations, then the world. (United States, Congress) By placing the environment at the forefront of the conversation, we place ourselves in the future with the rest of our community. A mobility of sort, on a political, economic, and social scale does not take control of the environment, once again trying to maneuver and adjust it to our needs – rather, we take responsibility for our actions, adapting to our growth, and account for ourselves within an interdependent web of interactions of which we have an increasingly large amount of influence.

Works Cited

“Bible: The Old Testament.” SparkNotes, Barnes and Nobles,

www.sparknotes.com/lit/oldtestament/section1/​. Hui, Dafeng. “Food Web: Concept and Applications.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, 2012,

www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/food-web-concept-and-applications-840771

81/​. IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

[Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva,

Switzerland, 104 pp. Krishnamurti, Jiddu. Freedom from the Known. Ebury Digital, 2010.

Mcguire, Patrick and Rafael Katigbak, directors. Canada's Toxic Chemical Valley. YouTube,

VICE, 2013,

www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnHWZE0M_-k&list=PLEPt6jhJnMe3nZxoS7i7WSp

Edl8m5NVMJ&index=7​. Morton, Timothy. The Ecological Thought. Harvard University Press, 2012. Rapaczyński, Andrzej. “Morality and Politics.” Nature and Politics: Liberalism in the Philosophies of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, Cornell University Press, 1989, pp. 239–248. Sampaolo, Marco, et al. “WPA Federal Art Project.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia

Britannica, Inc., 4 Apr. 2019, ​www.britannica.com/topic/WPA-Federal-Art-Project​. United States, Congress, Green New Deal. 2019.