 |
| URL: http://wildfitnessblog.com/ wp-content/uploads/2010/08/tree-hug3-299x300.jpg |
David Orr’s “Love It or Lose It: The Coming Biophilia
Revolution” discusses the difference between biophobia and biophilia. Orr
explains Biophobia as ranging from being uncomfortable in natural places to
absolutely hating everything that’s not manmade, managed, or air-conditioned. “
Biophobia in short, is the culturally acquired urge to affiliate with
technology, human artifacts, and solely with human interests regarding the
natural world” (Orr 187). I do agree that there are some people whom go out of
their way to avoid nature, but not all people who use technology or that are
interested in human artifacts hate nature. People use technology all the time
when they are out in the woods or on the ocean or in the mountains. Compasses,
GPS devices, cameras, and much more are all used in these places so people can
explore our natural world and preserve its beauty.
Biophilia, Orr defines as an “affinity for life”(187). Enable
to be a biophiliac one must love all living things, which I think would be
quite impossible. A person may love many living things, but there is
usually
always that one thing that you can’t stand or are afraid of. For example I love
many animals and being out in nature, but I am petrified of most snakes and
spiders and I know many people are like that. |
| URL:http://ontherealny.com/ wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Central-Park-Autumn.jpg |
“If we are to preserve a world in which biophilia can be
expressed and can flourish, we will have to decide to make such a world”(Orr
188). This is one thing I would definitely have to agree on. Though I do not
believe there are two completely different categories people fall under in
terms of nature, I do believe we are ignoring the fact that we are continuously
destroying our environment. People rely heavily on technology, which in some
cases is perfectly fine, but it is taking over our world. We are destroying
natural habitats left and right to build more houses, businesses, or hotels, I don’t
know if
the repercussions are even thought of. To preserve such a world in
which life can flourish we really do need to decide to make said world. We must
change many of our habits in order to preserve and protect the natural habitats
we have left.  |
| URL:https://mpailes.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/blog2_1.jpg |
“The human mind is a product of the Pleistocene Age, shaped
by wildness that has but all disappeared. If we complete the destruction of
nature, we will have succeeded in cutting ourselves off from the source of
sanity itself” (Orr 210). I understand where Orr is coming from, but I believe
it’s a bit dramatized. He is right in the fact that we cannot completely
destroy nature, humans would not be able to live without it, we need the oxygen
from the trees and nature keeps us calm, keeps us human. Our minds have
advanced much further from the Pleistocene Age, if we go back to something that
primitive I don’t believe we would be able to function well either. We need a
healthy balance between our old world and our new one not the complete deletion
of one or the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment