“The Land of Ethic”
The author Aldo Leopold on his essay The Land of Ethics made two relevant points,
first the ecological conscience without an internal change in our conscience we could
continue in creating laws, regulations and more education and still would not be enough
to resolve issues that we face today. Another point that he made is the land of ethics
only enlarges all life in the earth, humans, animals, plants, waters, soils and any other
type form of life; according with the author they should be all part of one community his
own definition: The Land.
In the preceding statement “obligations have no meaning without conscience, and the
problem we face is the extension of the social conscience from people to land”. He claims
we still have a utilitarian view meaning that all our attempts for conservation are still for
the benefit of humanity only. Leopold suggest that an Ecological conscience should be
the understanding of the biotic community where every creature has a place in the
“Whole”.
In another statement: “Land-use ethics are still governed wholly by economic selfinterest, just as social ethics were a century ago.” He argues that if there is any ethics for
the land-use, it is mainly an economic interest. A major concern with this view as an
economic motives it is that a large number of members of the community have no
economic value. This form of view eventually will lead to eliminate many elements from
the Land.
The land of ethics is comprehensive understating of ecology intellectual and
emotional that should come from the individual from inside reflecting in attitudes and
actions. In the biotic community, all forms of life have the right of existence regardless
economic or any special interest. An ethical relation between man and land involves love,
respect, admirations and the recognition of precious value of all members from the Land.
In my own conservation philosophy, I believe that every creature or element is part of
just one community that has the right to live, respect and existence regardless of its
purpose or function.
Every human must understand that we are all part of one community and not see
ourselves as a superiority, which creates “separation mentality” that all natural resources
are for our own use only and we can decide whether is for our own benefit or the
community.
Our view today it is economic still, as an example land property the general idea is an
asset or investment that generate economically profit and if does otherwise is a “waste”.
Our conservation is not for the sake of nature for the value in itself, but still we conserve
because we are concerned in how this could affect ourselves with out it.
When Leopold says the land ethics is an extending community’s sensibility that means
I have the sensibility to acknowledge the existence of all members of the biotic
community. He probably emphasizes the word sensibility, because still our tendencies
when thinking in terms of community is still limit for humans only.
From this passage Leopold suggests, conservations, preservation, restoration and so
forth uses the “land ethics” (integrity, stability and beauty) and not otherwise, self-
interest, economic, obligations. I agree with his thesis because of my beliefs we are just
part of the Universe and we are all connected.
Which more motivates me Ethic or Aesthetics I say both could or could not motivate
me and I will explain why? Ethics (duty) the person is acting under an obligation or duty,
but not for his own conciseness, from his own will. It is external subject that leads the
person to act upon those principles. Beauty (aesthetics) because is up to the individual
look on what is beautiful or not beautiful “Beauty” is relative and subjective and same as
mention over ethics, the individuals approval could be base on looking external form and
deciding the values. On the other hand both could motivate me Ethics correspondingly
my duty to the land and all my actions should come from the motive of the good will,
meaning is good in itself, my motives come from my own will. Aesthetics my motivation
should not limit merely in beauty but also harmony, unity, well being and order.
Land Ethics emanates a true interest as a complete whole humans and nonhumans elements, as Leopold mention before ethics relating with social humans already
exist, he only extend beyond including all non-humans having same high regard value.
It is become difficulty to me ignore that the higher education is only preparing
citizens for the work field. Our current education does not focus in values, their main
concerns for higher education are skills and how we can be excellent workers. As Aldo
Leopold put on his essay, “The net result is that we have more education but less soil,
fewer healthy woods, and as many floods as in 1937”. What our education system implies
today is do well in school, learn as many skills possible, the more you have the more
qualified you are, after completion your chances of find a higher paid job would be
greater.
It is a challenge for our society overcome economics views, when this is what we
have been learning on academic and in general. Overall we are having more education,
but not necessary becoming better human been. I am afraid to say that school as well only
has an economic interest. Companies’ need more qualified employees and education
provide them individuals qualified for the necessary position. In conclusion, education is
almost not doing anything to shape our character.
I appreciated that he mention education, and clarified more what it teaches and
does not. In my opinion with advances of the technology and science, schools are still far
behind the same methods of teaching are same as centuries ago. Fewer teachers go
beyond the curriculum and try providing more knowledge s that can help us not only for
job but for life, open our mind and be more enlightened.