HI 100 / WR 100 R. S. Deese Boston University Fall, 2009

Cast your vote NOW in BEST PARAGRAPH SMACKDOWN!!!

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Paper 3, Draft 1

In his statement, Nye says that the world’s carrying capacity has more to do with society than it has to do with science. More specifically, Nye focuses on the decisions that individuals and society as a whole make. Our style of life has a lot to do with the world’s ability to carry some variable amount of humans. Thus, the earth may carry, for example, 10 million people who live a less consuming life-style. This number may be significantly lowered if people choose more consuming life-styles. Ultimately, what Nye is trying to get at is that science does not set numbers in stone. Rather, those numbers have a lot to do with the way the people choose to treat the world around them.
Although Nye makes a good argument, I think that it is safe to say that science has significantly increased the carrying capacity of the world. Although this is not entirely independent of the way people live, technology’s ultimate goal is to make production more efficient. The textile industry is a great example. In the past, most people could only afford one or two attires. Today, each person has countless amounts of clothes. This is due to the efficiency in these industries, which ultimately brings down the cost of the product. As technology becomes more advanced, life becomes cheaper. This contributes to the rising carrying capacity of the earth. Thus, we can say that in general, technology raises the carrying capacity of the earth.
Another factor that is increasing earth’s carrying capacity of man is the ability of humans to dominate. Because they are able to manipulate almost everything around them, they have done so in a way that best fits their immediate needs. Due to this process, many species have gone extinct. This decreases the demand for resources on earth. This allows man to take control of those resources. This, in turn, raises the earth’s immediate carrying capacity. However, this may ruin the earth’s natural cycle, which could lower the carrying capacity in the long term.
Merchant makes somewhat of a similar argument that Nye does, only she is more extreme. Merchant, like Nye, argues that science can vary greatly depending on the social aspects that affect it. However, Merchant takes it one step further and says that science is not only affected by social constructs, but is created by them. As such, there can be no ultimate truth because everything is relative.
Although both writers argue the same point, the extent to which they choose to push the argument makes a profound difference in the validity of the argument.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search This Blog

Followers

By 2050, the world will:

"Science is not a process of discovering the ultimate truths of nature, but a social construction that changes over time." Carolyn Merchant. Radical Ecology (Routledge, 1992) pg. 236

"Money, which represents the prose of life, and which is hardly spoken of in parlors without an apology, is, in its effects and laws, as beautiful as roses." Emerson

RATE IT: "Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end. . ." Henry David Thoreau

RATE IT: “Once a new technology rolls over you, if you're not part of the steamroller, you're part of the road.” Stewart Brand

Blog Archive