READ
First read

 
Second read
(please read IN ORDER listed below; the 2nd essay is a response to the 1st!)

  1. Singer*, All Animals are Equal”
  2. Pollan, “An Animal’s Place” Link: https://michaelpollan.com/articles-archive/an-animals-place/

(note that this 20-year old essay uses outdated language for mental disabilities)
*Note: I urge you to read Peter Singer especially carefully, as we will consult it throughout the quarter. Singer’s essay is the most well-known piece on animal rights, so you should know it inside and out!
Third read
1) Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass, length: 19 pages (or less if you only read one of the two chapters here. Both are great, but if you must chose one to save time, that’s ok)
 
2) Aldo Leopold,  A Sand County Almanac (length: 24 pages)
 
About the Authors (please read this for context!!!)
Robin Wall Kimmerer is a member of the Potawatomi tribe and combines her Native heritage with scientific training and environmental passions throughout her publications. She is a Professor of Environmental and Forest Biology at the State University of New York, and author of books including Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants (2013) and Gathering Moss (2003).
Kimmerer is a proponent of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), which Kimmerer describes as a “way of knowing.” TEK is a deeply empirical scientific approach and is based on long-term observation. However, it also involves cultural and spiritual considerations, which have often been marginalized by the mainstream scientific community. Wider use of TEK by scholars has begun to lend credence to it. Kimmerer’s efforts are motivated in part by her family history. Her grandfather was a member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, but received colonist schooling at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The school set out to “civilize” Native children,  forbidding residents from speaking their language, and effectively erasing their Native culture. Knowing how important it is to maintain the traditional language of the Potawatomi, Kimmerer studies and continues to speak traditional language because “when a language dies, so much more than words are lost.”
Her current work spans traditional ecological knowledge, moss ecology, outreach to tribal communities, and creative writing.
Aldo Leopold (born 1887) is often credited as the founder of modern ecology. When he published The Sand County Almanac in 1949 (you’re about to read a few chapters from the book), it became one of the manifestos of 20th century ecology.  Beyond its scientific distinction, the work is also recognized as a classic piece of American nature literature.
Leopold is one of the first American scientists to develop an ethical theory that includes non-human entities and nature itself in the purview of morals. As we’ve already discussed, his predecessors had claimed that moral consideration only applied to creatures capable or rationality, or possessing a soul, or belonging to a privileged species (eg humans), or having sentience or a telos, or because they are alive (biocentrism). Yet Leopold argued that membership in Earth’s community should be our ultimate criteria for extending moral consideration. And since everything is part of the community, everything should be valued and treated with reverence.  In this way, Leopold’s environmental ethics enlarged the boundaries of what ecologists mean by “community” to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land. (This becomes the foundation of Leopold’s “Land Ethic”). You will notice how this perspective (based in science and ethical philosophy) also aligns with Indigenous wisdom (or TEK) like the views of Robin Wall Kimmerer … an example of the “convergence” at the heart of David Suzuki’s book as well!
 

COMPREHENSION QUESTIONS*

* you are NOT required to submit responses to these questions, but you SHOULD take notes for yourself and be able to answer these after completing each reading. You will use your notes and insights from these questions to develop your Reading Responses (due every 2 weeks in the quarter), so it’s important to take notes as you work through the readings. 
 
First read

  1. What connections does Harper draw between anti-racist/anti-classist beliefs on the one hand, and “compassionate consumption” practices on the other? Give some specific examples of how she connects oppression of different groups (both human and nonhuman) within both contemporary and historical systems.
  2. Why does Harper argue that mainstream “healthy consumption” and “eco-sustainable” messages are embedded in systems of white privilege? How does she work to overturn this in her own advocacy for compassionate consumption practices? 
  3. Review Aph Ko’s “5 Reasons Why Animal Rights Are a Feminist Issue.” Are any of her 5 arguments particularly convincing, or unconvincing, to you? Explain your position.  

 
Second read

  1. What does Singer mean by the term “Speciesist”?
  2. According to Singer, what characteristic qualifies a being for moral standing? Explain his reasoning.
  3. Does Pollan think that animals can feel pain or suffer? What distinction does he draw between “pain” and “suffering”?
  4. Discuss Pollan’s views on the domestication of animals. Does he consider it exploitation/enslavement? Why or why not?
  5. Some critics argue that the graphic images and shock tactics used in Animal Rights campaigns (footage like you viewed in these documentaries) is counterproductive, driving much of the public away from learning more about livestock production and laboratory practices.  Did you find the approach in these films effective? Or would you be more responsive to the “rational and tempered argument” Peter Singer promotes? What are the ethics of “witnessing” versus refusing to look?

 
Third Read

  1. What kind of ethical philosophy does the story “Skywoman Falling” communicate? How is this Indigenous “creation story” different from other creation stories you might be familiar with (Judeo-Christian, Islamic, etc)?
  2. On page 9 Kimmerer states that in Native ways of knowing, human people are often referred to as “the younger brothers of Creation.” How can humans learn from plants and animals? How can we humble ourselves to “listen” to the wisdom of plants or other creatures?
  3. The ‘Gift of Strawberries’ (pp. 22-32) introduces the reader to the concept of “the essence of a gift economy is, at its root, reciprocity.” (p. 28) How can “the relationship of gratitude and reciprocity that has been developed increase the evolutionary fitness of both plant and animal”? (p. 30)
  4. Why does Leopold include the anecdote from Homer’s ancient tale “The Odyssey”? How is his strategy similar to Peter Singer’s in using broad historical trends in human ethics to tell the story about our changing views towards nature and non-humans?
  5. Re-read the last full paragraph of 266 thru the second-to-last paragraph of 267. Here, Leopold describes cranes more like a poet or philosopher than an ornithologist. Why does Leopold include this passage at the beginning of this reading? If Leopold simply wanted readers to care about conservation, why didn’t he just explain the scientific principles (rather than telling stories about these birds?)  What strategy is being used here, and what effect does it have on your as a reader?
  6. What is Leopold’s critique of applying economic analysis to environmental thinking, practice and policy? Analyze his argument in detail. (see 283- 5)

 
 
Students will write a response to the assigned readings, films and other course materials covered since the last reading response. This is a place for you to record your thoughts about what we’re learning, and further develop the methods of philosophical analysis we will practice in class.  Assessment will be based on evidence that you have remained engaged in class and used each entry to develop your critical thinking, philosophic and ethical perspectives, and understanding of the issues and debates.
 
INSTRUCTIONS
Review the materials assigned since your last submission (2 weeks ago) and write a ~650 word response (longer entries are OK) that touches on the most important ideas/points from *EACH* day. High-scoring responses will integrate concepts from most or ALL assigned materials (although there may be some occasional discussions where you don’t incorporate the smaller/secondary readings or media if you already thoroughly covered the concepts in analyzing the primary/first reading from that day). At a minimum you must address the “main” reading or video (the first one listed in the module) for each day. And to earn an especially high score, you should also touch on the smaller/secondary pieces on the list for that day as well.
 
What do I write about?
Reading responses should record your thoughts and interpretations about what we’re reading, and further develop the methods of *PHILOSOPHIC* and *ETHICAL* analysis we’re practicing in class. What you choose to focus on is ultimately up to you, but it should be based on the assigned material, and ideally trace connections (or contrasts) between those materials. Please go beyond just summarizing the readings to really dig into the implications and philosophic dimensions of the issue. Assessment will be based on evidence that you have remained engaged in class and used each entry to develop your critical thinking, philosophic and ethical perspectives, and understanding of the issues and debates.
Before writing your entry, you can consult the reading comprehension questions (on the daily Canvas modules); however, while these may be helpful to take into consideration, the idea is *NOT* to just answer a list of Canvas questions verbatim, but rather expand on the issues you find interesting, trace connections, and share your unique perspective on them. Also keep in mind that strong philosophic writing often does NOT reduce an issue down to simpler terms, but rather expands on its complexity and ambiguity, revealing additional perspectives, philosophical insights, and possibilities within that work. Responses that engage complexity and nuance in these debates will generally earn a higher score.
 
REQUIREMENTS (grades will be based on these elements)

  • Length: ~650 words (longer entries are OK too!)
  • Include materials covered in the last 2 weeks. Choose as least the “primary” reading (the first one listed in the module) for EACH day. This means there will be a minimum of 4 items included if we’ve had 4 full class modules since your last submission. High-scoring responses will integrate concepts from most or ALL assigned materials (although there may be some occasional discussions where you don’t incorporate the smaller/secondary readings or media if you already thoroughly covered the concepts in analyzing the primary/”main” reading from that day).
  • Take a philosophic or ethical approach to analyzing the material, rather than just summarizing it or focusing on scientific/technical aspects. Remember this is a class on ETHICS, so you should think and write like a philosopher!
  • Try to trace connections (or contrasts) between the different materials, rather than discussing different issues for each reading/film featured in your essay.
  • Posts should give specific evidence that you completed and understood the week’s assigned materials. This means directly responding to details from the reading (or podcast or film) so I know you completed it. Entries that do not specifically refer to points, arguments, quotes or scenes in the material, but simply lapse into generalizations or personal opinions, will receive a low score.
  • You may include personal reflections & experiences related to the topic, but these should not displace the assigned reading.
  • Demonstrate that you have remained engaged in class discussions but also developed your own, original thoughts

 

RR2
Tagged on:     
We have updated our contact contact information. Text Us Or WhatsApp Us+1-(309) 295-6991