At times, I partake in certain activities only because doing them has been deemed socially as the ‘right’ thing to do.
One such instance: attending church.
Once, about two years ago, I went to church on Easter Sunday. It seemed like the right thing to do – visit a place that commemorates Jesus’ resurrection on a holiday thus designed. Everyone good goes to church on Easter. And I didn’t want to do wrong.
…The experience turned out to be bittersweet. Sweet because everyone in church was extremely friendly. --doling out honey-kissed smiles and sun-warmed handshakes. Bitter because no one seemed to know why they were there. It was scary. They chanted what they had memorized and repeated verses following the priest’s lead. But what baffled me is that no one seemed to consciously understand what he or she was saying. What they said was merely ritual. Maybe the conscious understanding of the chants was at one time mindfully processed. But why continue to repeat something that has already been understood?*
Another (recurring) instance: recycling.
I recycle. I am not exactly sure why except for the reason given to me by environmentalists: doing so saves the planet. Well to that I say, “Oh yeah?!”
I’ve been faithful to the cause for a long while now, mindlessly recycling because it is the ‘right’ thing to do. But recently I have been in a state of questioning. Does all this recycling, reducing, and reusing really actually slow the effects of global warming? Shouldn’t I be sure that all of my efforts to save the world are warranted? And, as the economist Steven Landsburg questions, is it the sacrifical ritual of recycling that I and declared environmentalists crave, or do we recycle because of our genuine concern for its consequences?*
Think.
...
*With these thoughts of skepticism, I am in no way trying to denounce faith or environmentalism, I am merely trying question why people do what they do. Insightful, humorous, and vengeful comments are greatly appreciated.
4 comments:
Interesting point. However, even if recycling creates no large difference (as of now I'm convinced it does) I'm of the opinion that it's a good 'gateway' to causing larger change. If recycling becomes a norm, something that we do and expect others to do, then it seems to me that making the leap from recycling at home to say, recycling at work, becomes easier.
While the analogy of church making us feel good when we go, and recycling making us feel good because we do it, does make sense, I'm not entirely sure that the motivations behind them are the same.
Attending church in the fashion you mentioned seems to make us feel better because of some hold over from our upbringing, or because of societal pressure. While we experience these with recycling, if we work on the assumption that it -does- do something good for the planet, then surely the good that we feel, in addition to caving in to societal expectations, is because we're doing something positive for our world?
While the same argument could be applied to going to church, I'm not sure that going to church is perceived by most people as something that you do for the 'greater good'
Anyway, just some random observations from someone who still recycles. hah!
"With these thoughts of skepticism, I am in no way trying to denounce faith or environmentalism, I am merely trying question why people do what they do."
This is an intellectual cop-out SDL; there's nothing wrong with denouncing faith when it's merited. (Hey, you asked for vengeful comments.) If a loved one tells you that she is going to receive "mud therapy" in order to treat her cancer because she "just believes it'll work," you should do your best to denounce her faith without any prejudice, if not for saving science but at least for saving her. She's not going through with such quackery because she enjoys the texture of mud; she's doing it because she believes it will cure her. If the mud isn't going to cure her cancer, those of us that are better informed have a responsibility to disabuse her of the false notion, i.e. denounce her faith. Being polite about merely masks the idiocy behind such belief and also encourages ridiculous beliefs in the future.
Likewise, when recycling is based on faith and doesn't actually achieve its intended purpose, we have a responsibility to speak up.
How do environmentalists know that recycling is good? How does bedeo know that it's a "good gateway to causing larger change?"
When pressed, most practitioners of Recyclianity--like you--can openly admit that they don't have any sound justification other than because they've been told it's the right thing to do. Its the staunch believers that claim to know the answer where none exists that we need to be wary of. (and belittle...or bludgeon if necessary)
How is recycling a sham? Michael Munger puts it best:
"There is a simple test for determining whether something is a resource (something valuable) or just garbage (something you want to dispose of at the lowest possible cost, including costs to the environment). If someone will pay you for the item, it's a resource. Or, if you can use the item to make something else people want, and do it at lower price or higher quality than you could without that item, then the item is also a resource. But if you have to pay someone to take the item away, or if other things made with that item cost more or have lower quality, then the item is garbage."
Manufacturers gladly purchase used metals like copper and steel because it is cheaper to use such material, and by cheaper I mean it ultimately saves resources. But such is not true for certain types of glass and yard-waste. For example, it actually takes more resources to make new green glass from recycled ones, than to make it from scratch!
We have no way of knowing whether believing in Christianity will get you to the Pearly Gates, but we do know that recycling indiscrimately does NOT save the environment. So don't be shy about making fun of those avid environmentalist that want you to recycle everything irrespective of the costs. They're wrong.
in the case of a loved one that wants to cure cancer with mud therapy...i agree that belief in such a fantastical view of therapy is not rational and that this irrationality should be addressed with the loved one. however, i don't believe that denouncing the sick's faith will in any way help this person get well. infact, belittling her views might even have reverse-the-intended effect as many people rebel and become close-minded when they are told they are flat wrong.
as a scientist, i would without doubt, inform this loved one of rational and fact-based alternatives to mud therapy. however, if a loved one wants to cope with her disease by believing in a higher mud power, i cannot stop her...unless of course, she is hurting others with her beliefs.
the same goes with recycling. with this blog, i have (if i wrote it well enough) asked that people think and reflect upon why they do what they do...and maybe this will encourage them tolook towards a rational approach of explaining their actions. in my personal view, i am still not sold one way or another as to whether recycling actually helps the environment. and as a trained scientist i am looking for facts and well supported theories to convince me one way or another.
i don't want denounce others for feeling good about themselves. some people need faith to feel good. there's nothing wrong with that - so long as they see & respect the scientist's viewpoint as much as we see & respect theirs.
with that being said, if recycling, as you say, really is costing us more than it is benefiting us, we should present the facts and start informing!
now. before bbc articles such as these continue to taint people's minds
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7010522.stm
Post a Comment