Ecological Literacy David Orr Summary
In the article “Ecological Literacy: Education and the Transition to a Postmodern World,” David Orr (1992) presents his argument about the lack of emphasis on ecological literacy by our education system and how this discrepancy can be bad for society as a whole. Orr (1992) precedes his argument with an explanation of ecological literacy, and its importance in the lives of all people. He claims that just as regular literacy and mathematical skills are vital to everyday life, so is ecological literacy, the only difference being that ecological literacy is virtually untaught in our society. Orr’s (1992) central theory is based upon his belief that, “by failing to include ecological perspectives in any number of subjects, students are taught that
…show more content…
ecology is unimportant for history, politics, economics, and society” (Orr, 1992, p. 300). This deficiency in the understanding of ecological literacy creates a problem for everyone on Earth, since future generations will be unable to maintain the world as a sustainable place to live. Orr (1992) gives many reasons to this discrepancy in subjects being taught, and while some seem a bit stretched and incongruous, all are valid points that can be verified by my own personal experiences. Attempting to live on earth without a solid understanding of ecological literacy is comparable to “trying to balance a checkbook without knowing arithmetic” (Orr, 1992, p.300). Orr (1992) begins his argument with an attempt to explain his theory why ecological literacy is so difficult to successfully integrate into modern education.
He claims that modern attitudes, by their very nature, work against the concept of ecological literacy. Children are taught through television “that the earth is theirs for the taking” (Orr, 1992, p. 300). I agree with Orr (1992) in that modern faith in technology has reached the point where people believe that scientists will devise some plan to stop global warming and create new wells of energy to fuel their lives, before the earth becomes a toxic hell. Orr’s (1992) claim that these types of attitudes do indeed work against ecological literacy is sustained by my own experience. I grew up thinking it would not matter what kind of food I ate or how I exercised, because I thought science would create a cheap, painless way to lose weight by the time I would have to worry about it. But now, I can see the effects of my slowing metabolism and I know that healthy eating habits and proper maintenance of my body are the best way to move into the future, just as taking preventive measures to keep the earth healthy, is clearly a better choice than waiting for a perfect solution to arise. Many people share my postmodern mindset and view the environment in a similar way to how I used to view my health. “[Ecology’s] goal is not just comprehension of work the world works, but, in the light of that knowledge, a life lived accordingly” (Orr, 1992, p.
302).
Orr’s (1992) conjecture that “ecological literacy is becoming more difficult…not because there are fewer books about nature, but because there is less opportunity for the direct experience of it,” gives a slightly stretched, but still applicable, reason for the failings of ecological literacy in modern society (Orr, 1992, p. 303). By interacting with the environment on a regular basis, Orr claims that one can feel a “sense of place” rather than the “sense of habitat” that arises when “the ratio between the human created environment to the purely natural world exceeds some point” (Orr, 1992, p. 303). “A sense of place requires more direct contact with the natural aspects of a place…this sense is lost as we move down the continuum toward the totalized urban environment” (Orr, 1992, p. 303). People are becoming comfortable with the ugliness and “sense of habitat” that are associated with urban landscapes, which gives them less motivation to opt for greenbelts, parks, and trees that can beautify an urban environment, as well as provide ample opportunity to experience nature. Again, I coincide with Orr (1992) in the belief that many people have become accustomed to spending too much time indoors, which leaves very few opportunities to spend time with the environment while doing day-to-day activities. Everyone morning I step outside to get a fresh breath of air and it always prompts me to consider to world I live in and to do what is best for the environment. With urban life slowly becoming more and more centered on anti-nature activities, people may eventually believe that they can replace the environment with a totalized urban habitat, completely removing any chance of interaction with the natural world. This complete transition to urban life, would only hasten the problems that society is facing today, such as global warming and diminishing forests. Throughout his explication, Orr (1992) mentions that ecological literacy “implies the ability to think broadly”, and how people are losing this skill in today’s world of specialization (Orr, p. 301). Professionals today are forced into a bottleneck line of work where they specialize in a very specific field, because spreading their expertise around different subjects only makes them less marketable in our technology heavy society. The “ability [to think broadly] is lost in this age of specialization” and those who “buck the pressures toward narrowness also endure a great deal of professional rejection and hostility” (Orr, 1992 p. 301). I have experienced firsthand that modern education systems are built to push people toward specialization and therefore, inhibit their ability to think broadly. My career as a college student is already pushing me into specialized classes, if I chose to take a variety of general subject classes, I would have to spend much more time at school to get a degree. While specialization may seen to be helping human society move forward, my knowledge from AP Environmental Science can show us that specialization is not best for the long term survival of a species. Specialist species are always more vulnerable to extinction by a small change in their surroundings, while generalist species are able to adapt and survive in many extreme situations. One many argue that modern technology, such as hydroelectric dam, would not be possible without the combined knowledge of specialized civil and electrical engineers, but what would an electrical engineer do if he happened to be alone and faced with the dam’s impending collapse? Human society may be making great leaps ahead thanks to specialization, but long-term survival depends on the ability to think broadly, which reinforces Orr’s (1992) claim of the importance of ecological literacy. While Orr’s (1992) argument about the lack of focus on ecological literacy by our education system varies in strength throughout his article, all of his points make sense and are verifiable by my own experiences. Even though Orr’s (1992) article was written fifteen years ago, society has only become more urbanized and technology oriented, which makes his argument even more effective. To further research Orr’s theory, it would be beneficial to watch the progression in the education of students who are exposed to ecological literacy concepts, and compare them to the education of those who are not. The main points of Orr’s (1992) argument are all centered on his observation that postmodern society is not well adapted for the concept of ecological literacy and this is sending us cascading down to oblivion. With modern attitudes working against ecological literacy, less opportunity to directly experience nature, and increasing specialization in today’s society, Orr gives relevant claims to support his argument that are verifiable by my own experiences.
ecology is unimportant for history, politics, economics, and society” (Orr, 1992, p. 300). This deficiency in the understanding of ecological literacy creates a problem for everyone on Earth, since future generations will be unable to maintain the world as a sustainable place to live. Orr (1992) gives many reasons to this discrepancy in subjects being taught, and while some seem a bit stretched and incongruous, all are valid points that can be verified by my own personal experiences. Attempting to live on earth without a solid understanding of ecological literacy is comparable to “trying to balance a checkbook without knowing arithmetic” (Orr, 1992, p.300). Orr (1992) begins his argument with an attempt to explain his theory why ecological literacy is so difficult to successfully integrate into modern education.
He claims that modern attitudes, by their very nature, work against the concept of ecological literacy. Children are taught through television “that the earth is theirs for the taking” (Orr, 1992, p. 300). I agree with Orr (1992) in that modern faith in technology has reached the point where people believe that scientists will devise some plan to stop global warming and create new wells of energy to fuel their lives, before the earth becomes a toxic hell. Orr’s (1992) claim that these types of attitudes do indeed work against ecological literacy is sustained by my own experience. I grew up thinking it would not matter what kind of food I ate or how I exercised, because I thought science would create a cheap, painless way to lose weight by the time I would have to worry about it. But now, I can see the effects of my slowing metabolism and I know that healthy eating habits and proper maintenance of my body are the best way to move into the future, just as taking preventive measures to keep the earth healthy, is clearly a better choice than waiting for a perfect solution to arise. Many people share my postmodern mindset and view the environment in a similar way to how I used to view my health. “[Ecology’s] goal is not just comprehension of work the world works, but, in the light of that knowledge, a life lived accordingly” (Orr, 1992, p.
302).
Orr’s (1992) conjecture that “ecological literacy is becoming more difficult…not because there are fewer books about nature, but because there is less opportunity for the direct experience of it,” gives a slightly stretched, but still applicable, reason for the failings of ecological literacy in modern society (Orr, 1992, p. 303). By interacting with the environment on a regular basis, Orr claims that one can feel a “sense of place” rather than the “sense of habitat” that arises when “the ratio between the human created environment to the purely natural world exceeds some point” (Orr, 1992, p. 303). “A sense of place requires more direct contact with the natural aspects of a place…this sense is lost as we move down the continuum toward the totalized urban environment” (Orr, 1992, p. 303). People are becoming comfortable with the ugliness and “sense of habitat” that are associated with urban landscapes, which gives them less motivation to opt for greenbelts, parks, and trees that can beautify an urban environment, as well as provide ample opportunity to experience nature. Again, I coincide with Orr (1992) in the belief that many people have become accustomed to spending too much time indoors, which leaves very few opportunities to spend time with the environment while doing day-to-day activities. Everyone morning I step outside to get a fresh breath of air and it always prompts me to consider to world I live in and to do what is best for the environment. With urban life slowly becoming more and more centered on anti-nature activities, people may eventually believe that they can replace the environment with a totalized urban habitat, completely removing any chance of interaction with the natural world. This complete transition to urban life, would only hasten the problems that society is facing today, such as global warming and diminishing forests. Throughout his explication, Orr (1992) mentions that ecological literacy “implies the ability to think broadly”, and how people are losing this skill in today’s world of specialization (Orr, p. 301). Professionals today are forced into a bottleneck line of work where they specialize in a very specific field, because spreading their expertise around different subjects only makes them less marketable in our technology heavy society. The “ability [to think broadly] is lost in this age of specialization” and those who “buck the pressures toward narrowness also endure a great deal of professional rejection and hostility” (Orr, 1992 p. 301). I have experienced firsthand that modern education systems are built to push people toward specialization and therefore, inhibit their ability to think broadly. My career as a college student is already pushing me into specialized classes, if I chose to take a variety of general subject classes, I would have to spend much more time at school to get a degree. While specialization may seen to be helping human society move forward, my knowledge from AP Environmental Science can show us that specialization is not best for the long term survival of a species. Specialist species are always more vulnerable to extinction by a small change in their surroundings, while generalist species are able to adapt and survive in many extreme situations. One many argue that modern technology, such as hydroelectric dam, would not be possible without the combined knowledge of specialized civil and electrical engineers, but what would an electrical engineer do if he happened to be alone and faced with the dam’s impending collapse? Human society may be making great leaps ahead thanks to specialization, but long-term survival depends on the ability to think broadly, which reinforces Orr’s (1992) claim of the importance of ecological literacy. While Orr’s (1992) argument about the lack of focus on ecological literacy by our education system varies in strength throughout his article, all of his points make sense and are verifiable by my own experiences. Even though Orr’s (1992) article was written fifteen years ago, society has only become more urbanized and technology oriented, which makes his argument even more effective. To further research Orr’s theory, it would be beneficial to watch the progression in the education of students who are exposed to ecological literacy concepts, and compare them to the education of those who are not. The main points of Orr’s (1992) argument are all centered on his observation that postmodern society is not well adapted for the concept of ecological literacy and this is sending us cascading down to oblivion. With modern attitudes working against ecological literacy, less opportunity to directly experience nature, and increasing specialization in today’s society, Orr gives relevant claims to support his argument that are verifiable by my own experiences.