Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Is overpopulation a myth
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Is overpopulation a myth
Paul Erlich as an Environmental Role Model
While studying butterflies in the 1950s to answer questions on biological classification, ecology and evolution, Paul Erlich started thinking about global populations. Since then, he has become one of the leading experts in the world on the subject of population and the author and co-author of over 30 books on population and the environment including his most famous in 1968 "The Population Bomb" (USC 1). Erlich was also the co-author and founder of the theory and field of co-evolution. Though Erlich has been criticized for predictions that have not come true (yet) and scrutinized over his figures, he remains a well-respected pioneer and a great communicator in political and environmental thought.
Born on May 29, 1932 in Philadelphia, he received his Ph.D. from the University of Kansas in 1957. It was while doing fieldwork in the 1950's that Paul and his wife, Anne, began to think about human population, over-consumption and the use of environmentally damaging technologies. This, with their research on butterflies, reef fish, and birds led Paul and colleague Peter Raven (Ph. D.) to the concept of co-evolution. Co-evolution explains the relationships between species and how one population affects another. These discoveries eventually led to one of Erlich's most important works, a textbook written in 1977 titled "Ecoscience; Population, Resources, Environment" (Dossier 2).
Paul Erlich has been a member of the Stanford University faculty since 1959 and belongs to a number of scientific organizations such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the American Philosophical Society. Some of his honorary degrees and awards include the John Muir Award of the Sierra Club, the Gold Medal Award of the World Wildlife Fund International, the MacArthur Prize Fellowship, the Crafoord Prize of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, the Heinz Environmental Prize and the United Nations Sasakawa Environmental Prize (USC 4).
The most well known of his books is the 1968 best seller "The Population Bomb." This book has been widely acclaimed and criticized. The book argued forcefully that the world was headed for catastrophic overcrowding, food shortages and starvation. Many of his critics are quick to point out his predictions have yet to materialize (Bailey 1). Erlich's response to his critics was expressed in an interview with Jim Motavalli from the Environmental News Network:
The one resource we will never run out of is imbeciles.
In the journal of Environmentalism as Religion, Paul H. Rubin discuss about how environmental is similar to religion. Rubin want everyone to know that the environment and religion are somehow similar in a way, which they both have belief system, creation stories and original sin.
For some people the numbers and facts don’t really matter, they read through Manning’s description of extinction and focus on the conclusion he created. Others will focus blindly on the increased extinction rate and rue the day mankind was created. But, there is one group of people who will see “before human domination” (pg. 1) and lose their scientifically accurate minds. Manning is unknowingly referring to the ratio between the background extinction rate and the actual distinction rate, i.e. what scientist think is the extinction rate right now with humans vs. no humans, and referring to it as if it is two completely different rates at two completely different points in time. Small flaws like these are insignificant to the average reader but comparable to kryptonite to credibility from a scientific audiences view. Throughout the essay, these inaccuracies consistently occur, those who know the law of thermodynamics know is not the same as energy transformation in a food-chain and that the scientific method that you simply can’t make conclusions drawn from two different fields of inaccurately portrayed science based on your opinion and call it
In the introduction to “Sustainability”, Christian R. Weisser represents his definition of sustainability by using a Venn diagram portraying the three aspects that, in his mind, sustainability must have to be successful. Specifically, the three aspects of sustainability he identifies are the environment, society, and economy, which he labels as “the three pillars of sustainability.” As Weisser puts it, “Sustainability must consider the environment, society, and the economy to be successful” (Weisser 6). In this quote, he is stating that the process of sustainability is a three-way process; if one of the pillars is gone, the rest collapse and the development of sustainment fails.
---. “Environmentalist for the Twenty-first Century.” IPA Review 52.3 (September 2000): pages 3-8. 3 April 2006 .
Willis, D. (2013, May). Audubon Rachel Carson Awards | National Audubon Society. Retrieved from Audubon: http://www.audubon.org/newsroom/press-rooms/audubon-rachel-carson-awards
The environment and the health of the surrounding population go hand in hand. The Environmental Protection Agency takes on this ever so important mission of protecting them both. The mission statement of the EPA states, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Small Business Programs is to support the protection of human health and the environment by advocating and advancing the business, regulatory, and environmental compliance concerns of small and socio-economically disadvantaged businesses, and minority academic institutions (US Enviromental Protection Agency, 2010).” The impact of its mission can be defined clearly as it examines the impact of contamination in the air, the water, and the land on human health.
Spencer, Herbert. “A Theory of Population, Deduced from the General Law of Animal Fertility.” Westminster Review. LVII (1852): 250-68.
Keith Henson a writer in evolutionary psychology once said that “Evolution acts slowly. Our psychological characteristics today are those that promoted reproductive success in the ancestral environment.” Evolution was first introduced by a naturalist by the name of Charles Darwin. Darwin had written an autobiography, at the age of 50, On the Origin of Species (1859) explaining how species evolve through time by natural selection; this theory became known as Darwinism. “Verlyn Klinkenborg, who writes editorials and vignettes on science and nature for the “New York Times”” (Muller 706) questions Darwin’s theory in one of his essays he wrote called Darwin at 200: The Ongoing Force of His Unconventional Idea. Both articles talk about the theory of Darwinism, but the authors’ use different writing techniques and were written in different time periods. Darwin himself writes to inform us on what the theory is, where as Klinkenborg goes on to explain why Darwinism is just a theory. Today, evolution is still a very controversial topic among many. It comes up in several topics that are discussed everyday such as in politics, religion and education.
Charles Darwin published his On Origin of Species in 1859. By 1870, Darwin’s theory of evolution was widely accepted as fact (van Wyhe, n.d.). This was no easy feat, Darwin was able to provide ample evidence from his voyage aboard the HMS Beagle, Darwin successfully implanted an idea. That idea took root and expanded into a profound science. The spread of ideas is at the very heart of civilization. Some ideas survive and thrive, while others wither and die on the vine. It was Richard Dawkins who pioneered the science behind the spread of ideas, and it is to him that those who count on the spread of their ideas, such as Jonathan Kozol, pay deference.
In August 1945, the United States dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. When she began writing Silent Spring in the 1950s, Carson was acutely aware of the short and long term impacts of these events (Carson, 1962). As a naturalist and scientists, she worried about the long term effects of nuclear fallout and the misuse of pesticides. Her work for the U.S. Department of Fisheries gave her unique insight into the rapid ecological system changes due to pesticide use and our own culpability in creating the insect and pest problem to begin with (Biography, 2011).
“Unless humanity is suicidal, it should want to preserve, at the minimum, the natural life-support systems and processes required to sustain its own existence” (Daily p.365). I agree with scientist Gretchen Daily that drastic action is needed now to prevent environmental disaster. Immediate action and changes in attitude are not only necessary for survival but are also morally required. In this paper, I will approach the topic of environmental ethics from several related sides. I will discuss why the environment is a morally significant concern, how an environmental ethic can be developed, and what actions such an ethic would require to maintain and protect the environment.
Ecologists formulate their scientific theories influenced by ethical values, and in turn, environmental ethicists value nature based on scientific theories. Darwinian evolutionary theory provides clear examples of these complex links, illustrating how these reciprocal relationships do not constitute a closed system, but are undetermined and open to the influences of two broader worlds: the sociocultural and the natural environment. On the one hand, the Darwinian conception of a common evolutionary origin and ecological connectedness has promoted a respect for all forms of life. On the other hand, the metaphors of struggle for existence and natural selection appear as problematic because they foist onto nature the Hobbesian model of a liberal state, a Malthusian model of the economy, and the productive practice of artificial selection, all of which reaffirm modern individualism and the profit motive that are at the roots of our current environmental crisis. These metaphors were included in the original definitions of ecology and environmental ethics by Haeckel and Leopold respectively, and are still pervasive among both ecologists and ethicists. To suppose that these Darwinian notions, derived from a modern-liberal worldview, are a fact of nature constitutes a misleading interpretation. Such supposition represents a serious impediment to our aim of transforming our relationship with the natural world in order to overcome the environmental crisis. To achieve a radical transformation in environmental ethics, we need a new vision of nature.
Southwick, C. H. (1996). "Chapter 15: Human Populations." Global Ecology in Human Perspective. Oxford University Press, 159-182.
When I think of the perfect place, I imagine a cascading waterfall, a vast forest, a stunning mountainside, or a warm sunset on the beach. I look up around me, mesmerized by the vastness of the natural world and breathe in the fresh air. Over the course of my life, I have come to respect the environment and the earth’s natural surroundings in ways that most others do not in the industrialized and technological era of today. I can appreciate the beauty of the Earth and of all the different landscapes and organisms that surround me. The way in which I value and treasure the environment has evolved just as I have. I see the environment as something to be preserved and admired, not destroyed or exploited. My relationship with the environment is
Environmental philosophy tries to make sense of the unexamined values, assumptions and ideologies behind humanities treatment of the environment and, in doing so, aims at helping to elicit an effective human response to related issues (Curry, 2011). Environmental philosophy, has gone beyond being merely an academic pursuit, now requiring the world’s population take moral responsibility for the damages caused by their industrial advances on natural systems.