As a transfer student who had lived in multiple countries and studied under many different viewpoints, signing up for an intro to environmental studies course seemed vaguely insulting. I was this experienced and worldly student with a passion for the environment, what more could an intro course teach me that I hadn’t already learned from previous intro courses? I walked into my first day of Environmental 160 expecting to earn an easy A and to fulfill a necessary, if somewhat frustrating, requirement.
I assumed I was bringing a somewhat unique perspective into the class, transferring from a school in the midwest that focused a great deal on agricultural methods and breaking down stereotypes that many people had about GMO’s or farming methods. I had always considered myself an optimistic and progressive environmentalist but it wasn’t until this class that I realized how dated many of environmental views actually were. This was a big dive off of the pedestal I had placed myself on and it took reading the multiple texts assigned in this course to sufficiently humble me again. One of the discussions we had that I found had a lasting impact was the concept of contemporary vs classic environmentalism. Despite the multiple schools I attended, I was always taught in the style of classic environmentalism. This created a fatalistic attitude towards the future of the environment while contemporary allowed for more wiggle room for the future. I was ready to throw in the towel and denounce the classic view when Professor Proctor stated that we can have a balance of both. After all, ENVS 160 was an interdisciplinary course, why couldn’t we have diverse viewpoints as well? Combining contemporary and classic was possible and, in my opinion, a more successful way to reach a larger audience.
In the book, Why We Disagree About Climate Change, the concept of “Lamenting Eden” struck a particular chord in me. I, along with a great deal of my peers, viewed the environment as a pure and unadulterated place, which humans had tarnished with their presence. This was a very much classic view and in many ways, limiting when looking to create solutions. By viewing humans as separate from nature, we pigeonhole ourselves into a solution: the removal of humans from the environment. This is not only morally questionable but feasibly impossible. It took this hit to my ego to allow for further growth in this course. The four myths discussed by Hulmes on how we viewed our climate were incredibly haunting. Besides “Lamenting Eden”, there was also myths such as “Constructing Babel” and “Presaging Apocalypse”. All of which offered many different results. It was frustrating to see my views so easily wrapped up under one sensationalist title. The analysis of each of these myths really helped me take the step from what I had thought before into a more blended viewpoint.
Another lesson I learned through this course is that the villains that I thought were responsible for climate change denial and climate abuse, were not always as bad as I thought they were. The group project we did on mining minerals had us focus on three different mines in very different locations. I was horrified to discover that mining could be done in a more sustainable way and many companies are in the process of moving in that direction. The images of open pit mines were always used by activist groups to show how scarring it can be to the landscape. However, through our studies, we found that open pit mining is not the worst possible practice and that it can be done without long term damage for the most part. I had also thought that religious institutions were not huge supporters of environmental sustainability. Yet, in Why We Disagree About Climate Change, a large part of a chapter is dedicated to religious groups that are advancing the environmental cause and calling upon other groups to do so.
Overall, this class was a reminder that I still had a great deal more to learn about the world and how we all view the climate. It never really occurred to me before to wonder as to why we disagreed about climate change or how to find ways to bring us all together. I had just always assumed that with education, everyone would start to get along. This class was a humbling experience and a great motivator for wanting to find out more about the modern environmental movement.
Works Cited:
Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.