Kathleen Nystrom

Discussion Board Post: Community

CPLT: Values and Ethics in Literature
1. Leopold also refers to the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule. How do
these references affect us as readers? What authority is Leopold relying on as he
makes his arguments, and to what end?

Leopold is appealing to the good Christian faith that was very prominent during his time.
The 1940s were a much more religious era and the majority of his audience would have
been Christian or at least understood the references. For many people, the majority of
their morals and ethics are based on faith and the Bible. The use of biblical references
verifies that the land ethic aligns with these people’s religious ideals. Further, even those
who don’t much about the Bible know that the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule
are important moral codes that any religion can agree on. This confirms that Leopold is of
good ethic and good morals.

2. Do you agree that “there is as yet no ethic dealing with man's relation to land and
to the animals and plants which grow upon it. Land, like Odysseus' slave-girls, is
still property. The land relation is still strictly economic, entailing privileges but
no obligations.” Why or why not? Do you think we need an ethic that deals with
our relation to land, animals, and plants? Why or why not? Whose job is it to
develop this ethic? Should the government? Society? Individuals?

I do agree with Leopold that there must be an ethic regarding our relation to species who
are non-human. It is easy to lose sight of the fact that there is more on this Earth than
humans, and that we are not the only living creatures who have purpose. I had never
thought about the concept that land is property and property is slavery. This analogy is
important because back in Odysseus’ time, and for too many generations after, it was
normal to think of living people as property. It was generally unquestioned and people
were not thought of as unethical when they dehumanized and abused other people.
However, now, it is a horrid history that we look back on with guilt and disgust. Leopold
uses this analogy to imply that one day, we will look back on the way that we treated
nature with the same hindsight. Though slaves were one day an economic necessity, the
development of certain ethics overpowered the economic gain. Eventually, I hope that the
ethics of land and nature overpower the economic need to destroy them. This ethic is
necessary because our ruthless depletion of the world is destroying bits of the community
that we live in. Every aspect of the world’s community is important to survival and
happiness of all creatures, humans are just to ethnocentric to realize it. This ethic must be
developed through society, because otherwise it will not be accepted. As Leopold
explains with the farmers, the law has no effect until the society accepts it and realizes its
need.

3. “Land-use ethics are still governed wholly by economic self-interest, just as social
ethics were a century ago.” “Obligations have no meaning without conscience,
and the problem we face is the extension of the social conscience from people to
land.” Considering that this text was written in the 1940s, are these comments still
relevant today? Provide a current example to illustrate your point. In your
example, you can consider the larger context of the extension of the social
conscience from people to their community rather than just land.
Kathleen Nystrom
Discussion Board Post: Community
CPLT: Values and Ethics in Literature
I do believe that land-use ethics are still governed by economic self-interest, though it has
progressed a bit since then. However, most government regulations on the environment
are based on the idea that we must conserve the land so that we can use it for economic
gain. There is not much conscience involved in environmental conservation it seems. The
statement, “Obligations have no meaning without conscience” is very accurate and
relevant. I know from personal experience that this is often an issue with volunteer
programs. In high school, I was involved in a service club that was very popular at my
school not because people wanted to help the community, but because the organization
was helpful on college resumes. It was frustrating because people simply wanted to
record their minimum amount of volunteer hours and move on. There was no compassion
in their service and no motivation to be and do better things. The program had no growth
and only achieved the bare minimum in a community that could have used more help
than it was getting. The organization became one of obligation rather than conscience and
therefore, there was very little communal gain.