University of Northern Iowa

Nar and the Environment: A Position StatementAuthor(s): Joseph W. MeekerSource: The North American Review, Vol. 257, No. 3 (Fall, 1972), p. 88Published by: University of Northern IowaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25117382 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 08:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

University of Northern Iowa is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The NorthAmerican Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.96 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 08:57:10 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NAR AND THE ENVIRONMENT A Position Statement

(Jn Earth Day, 1969, the general public was given a

diagnosis that informed people had known of long before: Mother Nature is suffering from hardening of the arteries, or

perhaps terminal cancer. Promptly

we called upon our

practitioners of nature, the scientists and technologists, who

have since been busy debating remedies and even applying a

few. Other practitioners from sociology, politics, and

economics have also been called in for consultations, con

siderably broadening our understanding of the illness and

suggesting further therapy. The search for causes has so far

been confined mostly to the patient's recent history, with

emphasis upon industrialization, economic exploitation, and

sudden rises in population density as the most likely sources of infection. Many practical-minded people take

comfort from their belief that the relatively sudden ap pearance of these symptoms

means that they can be made

to disappear just as suddenly. With a bit of creative

technology, some new laws, and a few changes

in social

behavior they expect to cure environmental disease.

Unfortunately, the problem is larger than that. The roots of environmental crisis run deeper into our culture

than technology, science, sociology, or

politics can reach

with their manipulative arms. Attitudes toward nature

which have led us to disrupt its processes have been nurtured by religious and philosophical beliefs, literary postures and imagery, esthetic values, and ethical tradi

tions which have persisted in Western culture for several

thousand years without being essentially changed by social or scientific modifications. We continue, for instance,

to believe that human dignity is somehow affirmed by our

capacity to rise above and control natural processes. We

think that we are human only to the extent that we can

overcome the animals around us and the animal within us.

We cannot resist the flattering thought that the world must have been created just to be used by mankind.

The human impact upon natural systems has been

guided by such ideas, beliefs, and emotional attitudes toward ourselves and our

surroundings. Our most sophisticated

technology is unlikely to invent an anti-pollution device which will cleanse our minds of the thoughts and feelings which have led us to environmental disaster.

It is time now for the humanities to accept its share of

responsibility for the study of environmental values.

Though chemical and surgical means may be available for

regulating reproductive rates, their use raises ethical ques tions which scientists are ill equipped to answer. The desire to preserve "beautiful" environments often leads to absurd

arguments as scientists and engineers dispute esthetic prob

lems for which they lack both vocabulary and insight. And as we explore more deeply the implications of oil develop

ment, the use of agricultural chemicals, urban pollution, and wildlife and wilderness preservation, it becomes in

creasingly evident that we cannot hope to solve environ

mental problems until we understand better how they have

grown from our own thoughts and feelings. The human

ities?particularly philosophy and literature?can provide measures of depth which have so far been notably lacking

in public discussions of the environment.

Environmental knowledge can also contribute impor

tantly to our understanding of art and thought. Ecology

has provided new

perspectives on

problems of form,

structure, and relationship which are at least as rich in

implications for humanistic studies as psychology and

anthropology were half a century ago. Evolutionary and

ethological studies of animals have suggested comparative approaches to the study of human ethics, patterns of

behavior, and social rituals, and the surface of this enor

mous area of inquiry has scarcely been scratched. Imagery and metaphors of nature have long characterized human

literature and language, but we have never until now been

in a good position to correlate these figurative

uses of

nature with scientific biological knowledge. Finally, since the study of environment is necessarily interdisciplinary, it

will require extensive revisions of educational methods and

structures as it matures. Should the humanists fail to

participate in that restructuring, they will not only be left out of major educational changes but will also miss a rare

opportunity to explore the common

ground they share with

the scientific community. The North American Review presently appears to be

unique among academic journals in its recognition that

environmental problems raise intellectual as well as tech

nological and social issues, and that these must be the con

cern of all thinking people regardless of any affiliation with a particular branch of learning. We hope in the coming

months to publish provocative and experimental writing which cuts across the conventional boundaries of science,

the humanities, and the arts in search of new insight into the meanings of the natural environment. Perhaps

we can

review North America and the world remembering that we share the land and sea with many other species of plants and animals. Our distinction as a

species is perhaps that we

are the only animal to publish journals, and that fact must

always remind us of our responsibility for understanding

the meaning of our actions and thoughts.

?Joseph W. Meeker

88 THE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW/FALL 1972

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.96 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 08:57:10 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions