A Modest Proposal Of A Sea Ethic

French writer Stendhal once simply claimed, “Our true passions are selfish.” We are raised to believe that actions rooted in selfishness are wrong; however, if egocentrism is a natural tendency of all humans, is it worth trying to change? Is it possible to use this trait for good? When faced with problems in marine ecosystems such as overfishing, pollution, endangerment of marine species, and the collapse of fisheries, rather than trying to convince users to be selfless, we should arouse people’s “true passions.” In other words, we must demonstrate how conserving would benefit them individually. Persuading people to care about the issues occurring in our oceans by provoking their self-interests, could be very successful. By convincing people

to focus on future rewards, rather than short-term gains, conservation efforts can begin now. Experts Carl Safina, Garret Hardin, and Edward O. Wilson have all contributed their ideas on this claim with many possible solutions similarly rooted in the need for a more moral mindset. An ethical perspective is necessary, and the easiest way to get people to think morally is if we show them that, in the long run, it is in their best interest to do so.
Ecologist Carl Safina supports the idea of facing marine problems with a moral perspective through his proposal of a “Sea Ethic”: “The challenge and opportunity is to cherish all life as the gift it is, envision it whole, seek to know it truly, and undertake—with our minds, hearts, and hands—to restore its abundance.” While it has been much easier for us to connect with terrestrial creatures, we must extend that connection “below the hide-tide line.” For example, people would be appalled if they were served an endangered species of tiger at a restaurant, but no one seems to mind when they see bluefin tuna, a species being fished out of existence, on the menu; this lack of compassion for marine creatures must come to an end.

Safina compares the undersea world to the above-sea one, and suggests that we must apply the acceptance that we feel for the creatures we live amongst, with the creatures who share our oceans. These goals can best be achieved by channeling our inner moralities, according to

Safina.
However, what was it that motivated Safina to channel such emotions?

Safina’s passion about saving the seas is not random, nor is it as selfless as it may seem. In the preface of his book, Safina describes his childhood: growing up, he was amazed by the sea and he bonded with his father over fishing striped bass. As overfishing and habitat destruction increased, the striped bass population declined severely. Around the same time, urban construction began to take place as he watched his beloved shoreline get destroyed. After these events, Safina was inspired to begin studying marine biology and his career as an ecologist and writer followed. His attempt to increase knowledge about the exhaustion of our oceans is rooted in his own personal hopes of one day restoring them to the way they were when he was able to fish with his father. Safina tries to convince people to share his passion in restoring the abundance of his ocean by appealing to their moral perspectives. He concludes his preface with, “But ultimately you must judge what the oceans’ creatures and its peoples have to say, and what it means to you.” Safina is motivated to spark change because of his own memories of the sea and his yearning to restore it; there now exists the need to find motivation in others, and convince them that it will benefit them in the long run to start conserving now. Similar to that of Carl Safina, we all have a natural tendency to be selfish. Expert Garret Hardin bases his thesis in this idea

of inherent self-interest in his article, “Tragedy of the Commons.”
Garrett Hardin offers much to think about in his article as he argues the unavoidable consequences of the combination of depleting a finite resource and facing a growing population rate. Hardin uses an example in which a pasture open to all herdsman is slowly but constantly depleted, to explain the tragedy occurring: “Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit—in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons.” Hardin proposes multiple solutions, all of which appeal to the long-term selfishness of human beings. For example, Hardin proposes the idea of mutual coercion mutually agreed upon. Although there exists no technical solution, by agreeing to live differently—more ethically—with understood penalties and universal laws, he believes it’s possible to change the way we use our resources. This solution requires people to give up some freedoms now, knowing that they will prosper in the future. Another solution he suggests is privatization, which would reduce the exploitation of resources by eliminating the “common” aspect. Assigning one owner to a common resource ensures that there is someone specific who will suffer financially if the commons is depleted. This being true, any one owner of a private resource will be more careful and conservative now, knowing that in doing so he will ensure his own success in the future. Both of Hardin’s solutions require a shift in values: from short-term, to long-term selfish thoughts. In other words, people need to realize that being conservative now will help guarantee that there are fish to be caught, and profits to be made, in the future.