Animal Self

A lot of the environmental issues the world faces today is due to the lack of what David Abrams calls the "animal self." The lack of a connection between people and nature has lead to nature becomed devalued less and less by people and being replaced with things like technology which can ultimately hurt nature. I think an important way to look at this idea of "animal self" is through the concept of evolution. People are animals, we evolved from them not away from them. The thing I believe that has truly seperated people from animals was the developement of culture. Somewhere along the lines people began to think our ability to think and talk seperated us from the animals we evolved from, then we put ourselves at the top rather than as part of the animal kingdom. The farther people put between themselve and the "animals self" the less nature will mean to them. Today nature doesn't mean very much to most people and this is why we are in the environmental situation today. Seperatation from nature devalues animals and makes them food, devalues trees and makes them paper, it makes nature into resources rather than part of a global balance that we used to be part of before we seperated ourselves. If the environmental issues today are ever to be resolved people need to return to nature the value we took away from it.

blog 6

The main part that I want to focus on in this section of the book is lifeboat ethics. This is a very important idea that we as humans need to take seriously. Lifeboat ethics refers to the problems that we as humans create in the environment. All of the humans are responsible for the negative impact we put on this world. The population is growing out of control to fast. In lifeboat ethics there are three basic options: We can attempt to save everyone which is impossible, therefore we will die, we can attempt to save some people, or we can attempt to save no one and move on. Many people would think that the first option is the most desirable. However, if you were actually put in that position, would you risk your own life to save others? Our basic animal instinct is to survive. Do whatever you can to survive. Today we live in a world that is denies most of our animal instincts, but there are still times when it comes out.

A great example of this would be the Titanic. Towards the end of the movie, all the rich people are in life boats while the others are freezing to death ion the water. They have to watch all the people die. That is our animal instinct: To do what is necessary to survive. As humans we create all sorts of emissions and other problems that our world has to face. We need to fix them or we will all have to face them at some point!

Blog 15

David Abrams is different than the recent philosophers that we have read. What I like most about him is that he does have a poetic twist on his writing, which I enjoy a lot. Just in the introduction, he rhythmically explains to the reader that this book, Becoming Animal: An Earthly Cosmology. His goal is to transform the reader into a “two-legged animal” that views nature as a critical part of their lives, not just something that surrounds us. He expresses a need to enable us to think in a critical way that binds us even more deeply to nature.

Abrams uses birds to focus on the Cartesian way of thinking about cognition. Abrams believes that thinking requires a whole body experience, not just the abstract involvement of the mind. Abrams also believes that technology keeps us in a shell that prevents us from experiencing actual nature. It keeps us from seeing its true value.

In class we watched parts of Winged Migration. I enjoyed watching the bits and pieces of this film much more than the Kestrel’s Eye. The sceneries were more varied and showed different species of birds and their unique characteristics. I think that watching clips of this film highlighted the beauty of nature.

I enjoyed reading Abrams so much that I am actually probably going to write my paper on him and contrast his beliefs with Descartes’ beliefs. I want to somehow tie in technology and the role that it plays in our society as well as include the two bird movies that we have watched in class. I also have been thinking about possibly tying in Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis somewhere in my paper as well.

David Abram

David Abram's take on nature, humans, and animals was very interesting to read. The very beginning - the introduction - to the pages sums it all up when he basically states we must tune our "animal sense to the sensible terrain" and then goes on to discuss nature in relation to humans. It seems as if all throughout the readin, Abram focuses on humans taking a better grasp on our "animal self". The species barrier is called to attention which I think poses a very important viewpoint both of Midgley and Abram.

Overall, we must change the way we think about the species barrier. It is not such a strict barrier as once thought to be. Rather, it is stressed how animals and humans are similar and, in relation to birds, they both adapt to different circumstances so there should be no hierarchy of order. I thought it was interesting when the comment was made in class - "we are contituted by our relationships with other species". The more I thought about this, it is nothing but the truth. Whether we want to aknowledge it or not, humans are related to all species. I feel that on a daily basis we relate to animals whether it is through hearing the birds sing in our shared environemnt or interacting with out pets. Abram's work made some very good points which reveals the fact that although humans tend to try to shut themselves off from the world of nature, we are, in fact, never fully removed form it.

Blog 15

I found David Abram's work interesting, but a challenge to read. His writing was more drawn out and fancy than was Kohak's for example. Kohak seemed to always get straight to the point, while Abram seemed to want to dance around the point with complex words and sentences - both approaches are fine, but I found I had to use my brain a little more while reading Abram's writing than I have had to do with the other texts we have looked at. One thing I really liked about the way he wrote was how descriptive he was. Although at times I was thinking, 'alright, I get that the earth is beautiful!', overall I liked the way he used lots of descriptions in order to paint a vivid mental picture for the read - especially in the prologue. I think his word choices worked well, and I really did get a good feel for what he was talking about and why he has so much respect for nature. The chapter about birds was very interesting. I really liked reading about the different types of bird communication because, as we talked about in class, it can really be useful in everyday life. I had never thought of how the sounds birds make differ from one another, but after being prompted to think about it by Abram's writing, I wondered why I had never thought about it before. After talking about the different bird sounds in class, it seemed obvious to me that the three types of noises were distinct - even though I had never really considered them before. What Abram said about birds and the way they communicate just further proves the point - in my mind at least - that animals do have their own language of sorts and should not be treated poorly based on their "lack" of language as we know it.

Blog #15

David Abram makes very good points, and I would have to say I agree with most things he says. He proves to show that animals and no better than humans, and humans are really no better than animals. We each have different ways of communicating in which neither humans or birds understand each other but each has their own language. Just because we do not understand what a bird could possibly be saying to one another does not make it any less of importance. Just because a bird cannot understand our conversations with one another, does not mean our conversations are not important. Birds have different ways of communicating in which we talked about today which are: Bird's song, "Clucking" their information to one another, for instance if they are trying to stick together, they have "location calls". Lastly, they have an "alarm call" which is more of a squawking sound. When talking about a birds squawking sound, a human could relate to someone yelling or hollering because this could be what we would say is our "alarm call". Once again, humans are no better than animals, nor are animals better than humans we just have different languages.

blog # 15

It is very interesting how Abram portrays animals throughout these chapters. He uses strong auditory imagery to connect the reader with the sense of nature he is trying to portray. His purpose is to remind us of where we came from, and challenges us to revisit our "animal-selves", understanding their nature to help understand ours. He uses examples about nature that reflect the way we live out our daily lives. He emphasizes that too long we have sheltered ourselves from the nature that surrounds us and something that is apart of us. He shows our connectedness using certain characteristic that are usually thought to be human, and explaining how they are evident in animals as well. For example, the characteristic of having language he argues is expressed in animals too, only in a different manner. The language of animals is more of a body language, but it is still a form of communication that they understand. There is meaning behind each action, as there is meaning behind each word, and both help a certain goal to be met. He also uses the concept of intellect, and portrays the spider's ability to weave a web so precise that it is exactly how it needs to be in order to accomplish its task, and each time the web is destroyed, the spider is able to rebuild it the same way again. He talks about the ability to adapt, and how even humans in some cases are not prepared for certain circumstances and must quickly adapt to the changes. All that he describes is very interesting, especially his examples with birds. His goal is to remind us of our origin and to "own up to being an animals, a creature of the earth", something that very few people choose to do (3).