Nonmoral Nature : Cruelty In Nature By Stephen Jay Gould

Food dominates the lives of people. It is used as comfort and fuel. But the controversy is, what should people consume? Burkhard Bilger 's piece, Nature 's Spoils, explores the abnormal way of eating, which is the fermentation of food. It is usually a safe practice, and also produces vitamins in the making. The Omnivore 's Dilemma by Michael Pollan expresses the problem of how humans select food. In How Do We Choose What to Eat? by Susan Bowerman she points out the influences on people’s life that affects their eating habits. By using Bowerman’s article as the keystone, Nature’s Spoils and The Omnivore’s Dilemma can be compared and contrasted. Since the food that people consume daily can affect them in the future, it must be chosen carefully.

According to Darwin (Date), there is no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental and perceived emotional faculties. In theory, every organism is engrained with complex, useful, and non-arbitrary bits of information that is essential to its survival. Organisms know when it is time to migrate, when it is best to hunt, and when mating should occur. According to Name (Date), these faculties are actually nonrandom parts of our development they must have come from either divine design or natural selection. The notion of whether or not divine design or natural selection is the result of an organisms faculties has sparked significant debate since Darwin first proposed his theory of natural selection

The Omnivore’s Dilemma, written by Michael Pollan, gives light to the question, “What should we have for dinner?” that he thinks Americans today cannot answer simply due to the fact that there are too many food options. This book serves as an eye-opener to challenge readers to be more aware and accountable of what is consumed daily. In order to understand fully where our food comes from, we must follow it back to the very beginning. Pollan goes on to discuss three different modern food chains in which we get our food: the industrial, the organic, and the hunter-gatherer. By tracing our food back to the beginning, we can understand that most of the nutritional and health problems America is going through today can be found on the farms that make our food and the government that can decide what happens. America deals with many food related illness such as, heart disease, obesity, and type II diabetes. Majority of a human and animals diet consists of being corn-fed leading to a high cause of obesity in the United States these are just some of the many diseases that come with over processed foods and diets we are unaware of. In this study, we will highlight the environmental and health issues and impacts related with modern agriculture and how these systems can be made more sustainable.

Alexander Von Humboldt was a Prussian naturalist whose work has helped shape and define our modern understanding of nature. He used enlightenment rationalism to navigate his way through life and his deep connection to his natural environment inspired a visionary movement in ushering out the monotheistic creationist worldview. “Humboldt’s books, diaries and letters reveal a visionary, a thinker far ahead of his time. He invented isotherms...discovered the magnetic equator...came up with the idea of vegetation and climate zones that snake across the globe…and revolutionized the way we see the natural world.” (Invention of Nature, 5). Although his work was extensive, author of ‘The Invention of Nature, Andrea Wulf suggests that his work has largely been forgotten due to his polymath approach of including art, history, poetry and politics that made him unfavorable. While Humboldt gave us our concept of nature itself, “the irony is that Humboldt’s views have become so self-evident that we have largely forgotten the man behind them.” However, although his work individual work may be overlooked, Humboldt’s success in making science more accessible work and as a result, his legacy lives on as the source of inspiration for many influential thinkers throughout history.

In The Omnivores’ Dilemma Michael Pollen’s objective is address, educate and convince the reader by analyzing our diets. He mentions we have become oblivious to what we are eating. Sometimes we wonder where our food comes from, and what ingredients are in it. Pollan states, “we would rather eat in ignorance”(11). The underlying message here is if people know what they are eating, they might not be able to eat comfortably again. Pollan uses this message to gain the reader’s attention. Pollan creates an illustration to help the audience visualize his experience. He also implements personal anecdotes and compare & contrast techniques to effectively persuade the reader, that what they are eating is unhealthy.

How much do you really know about the food you eat? Reading the book “The Omnivore 's Dilemma” by Michael Pollan,”Getting Real About the High Price of Our Cheap Food” by Bryan Walsh, and the movie “Food Inc.” gave me an idea of how our food is made and what is in it. Also reading the books gave me an idea, Michael Pollan mostly talked about corn and Bryan Walsh talking about high prices of our cheap food. Robert Kenner explains how we should look into our food to save us from getting sick or becoming obese.

How much do you really know about the food you eat? Reading the book “The Omnivore 's Dilemma” by Michael Pollan,”Getting Real About the High Price of Our Cheap Food” by Bryan Walsh, and the movie “Food Inc.” gave me an idea of how our food is made and what is in it. Also reading the books gave me an idea, Michael Pollan mostly talked about corn and Bryan Walsh talking about high prices of our cheap food. Robert Kenner explains how we should look into our food to save us from getting sick or becoming obese.

The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan is a comprehensive look into the present day food culture of the United States. Throughout the book the author tries to find out the true composition of the diet that is consumed by Americans on a daily basis. There is an excessive dependence by the American population on the government to know which food is good for them. This paper will critically analyze the book as well as the stance that the author has taken. Since there is a deluge of information about diets and health available today, the relevance of this well researched book in the present day world cannot be emphasized enough. Its relevance is not limited to the United States alone but to the entire human society which is moving towards homogenous food habits.

The questions, “What does it mean to be human, and how might we transcend human nature?” have been a subject of debate for philosophical and theological thinkers for centuries. In recent history, scientific discoveries have led to a resurgence of these ancient debates that break down into three primary schools of thought. There are those who believe that we, like the rest of the animal kingdom, have certain basic “programming” that determines our fundamental nature, and those who believe that human beings are born “tabula rasa” and that nurture determines who we are. The issue becomes increasingly complex for those with the theological belief that human beings are spiritual creatures and that our spirituality is what defines us. However, a

When thinking about morality, it is necessary to consider how aspects from both nature and nurture, along with free will, may form ones moral beliefs and dictate ones moral actions. To understand how moral beliefs as well as actions formulate and operate within individuals and societies, it is imperative that a general definition of morality is laid out. Morality, then, can be defined as ones principles regarding what is right and wrong, good or bad. Although an individual may hold moral beliefs, it is not always the case that moral actions follow. Therefore, in this essay I aim to provide an explanation that clarifies the two and in doing so I also hope to further the notion that one’s moral framework is a product of all three factors; nature, nurture, and free will. The first part of this essay will flush out what exactly morality it and how it manifests similarly across individuals and differently across individuals. Contrariwise, I will then explain how morality manifests similarly across societies and differently across societies. Alongside presenting the information in this order, I will trace morality back to primordial times to showcase how morality has evolved and developed since then, not only from a nature-based standpoint, but also from a

It is ironic that after reading, Hunter S. Thompson’s piece on 9/11, I found his arbitrary published at First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life. I had no idea he committed suicide in front of his son, daughter-in-law and six-year-old grandson. Also, he shot himself in the mouth while talking to his wife on the phone (Neuhaus, 2005).

Wright argued that individuals should rely more on instinct than obeying a set of morals or laws, like a religion may set. However, this can indirectly set up its own form of morality, one of instinctual reliance. In Wright’s time and even in today’s time people are by moving away from instinct toward reason to move us beyond in order to make free choices. Yet, this might not necessarily be a good thing. Reason is met with hesitation, where instinct is met with action. Renouvier argues that this is the epitome of pragmatism, selecting a belief and acting on it—it is our duty, our will, our right to believe.

In nature, the biotic community do not construct paradigms; however, humankind has allowed social constructs to set standards. The standards or logical ways of thinking, and viewing the world have set boundaries between rich, poor, privileged, unprivileged, men, and women. As noted by Professor Picarelli, nature, to reiterate welcomes variations that do not function within binaries. In the misfortunes and transformative events of history, political history, from the works of Aristotle, Aeschylus, Plato, Socrates, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and many others who have contributed to theory of what is not what should be have left the world with a way to view certain objective truths. Aristotle, once said “at his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst” and Aeschylus, “tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.”

The idea of the existence of evil in nature many times creates arguments between creationists and scientists concerning not only the design of nature by a creator –God, but the actual benevolence of God. In Stephen Jay Gould's essay "Nonmoral Nature" (1984), he explores this highly controversial issue by posing the question: "If God is good and if creation reveals his goodness, why are we surrounded with pain, suffering, and apparently senseless cruelty in the animal world?" He uses the life span of the parasitic ichneumon wasp to illustrate a scientific view that the concept of evil is limited to human beings and that the world of nature is unconcerned with it. To some degree Gould may be

The concept of morality plays an important role in human society. Through the discovery of what, exactly, determines that which is “good” and that which is “bad”, humans develop mechanisms that determine how they respond to or judge any given situation. What remains a mystery, however, is what, exactly, is the basis of morals. It is commonly believed that morals are learned through lived experiences, as well as, from those who act as each person’s individual caretaker(s). Even though these factors do play a significant role in determining morality, these factors alone neither create nor determine a person’s moral compass. In Paul Bloom’s work, Just Babies: The Origins of Good and Evil, we are introduced to the idea that morality, while partly learned, is something that is ingrained in humans from birth. Through multiple studies, performed both by Bloom as well as other psychologists, it is revealed that not only are babies able to perceive what is right and what is wrong, but also, from birth, babies are instilled with the innate knowledge of empathizing, valuing fairness and status, and valuing those who look similar versus those who look different. In spite of previous ideas, Bloom proves that babies are smarter than previously thought, while simultaneously recognizing the shortcomings of this “elementary” form of morality. Bloom’s finding prove to be revolutionary, in that they allow for the examination of different social structures, their shortcomings, and what