As a society, we strive for progress and we have come to view progress as a state of productivity and consumerism. Along this road of mass consumption and industrialization, we have negatively affected the environment; in the U.S. alone, 24 acres per person is consumed but only 4.5 acres are biologically productive worldwide (Earthdaynetwork N. Pag.). Conclusions based off of statistics foresee an ecological disaster in the near future if we persist to be unconcerned about how we affect the environment (See Appendix). It's obvious that humans have and are continuing to destroy the earth, but can we define this destruction as an immoral act?
[...] The American Museum of Natural History in NYC poled 400 scientists in 1998 and 70% of them agreed that one-fifth of all living species could disappear within 30 years (27). Another statistic states that 50% of the world's plants and animals will be extinct within 100 years, and this is detrimental to us because 25% of the drugs prescribed in the U.S. are derived from wild organisms (27). It is absurd to find out that in 1995 eighty countries had water shortages and 40% of the world didn't have clean water (28). [...]
[...] Similar to human-to-human relationships, if one person is always the taker and the other person is always the giver, the relationship is not healthy and eventually the relationship can no longer be beneficial to either party involved. Ultimately, the like the environment will have exhausted its resources or energies into the and no longer is able to give anything back. Since we are the only species capable of reasoning, this implies that we are responsible for the well being of other life forms. [...]
[...] Therefore, there is an underlying reason to not take care about the environment: you will never be coming back. They consider heaven to be sacred, not earth. The immorality in this indifference to the earth's well being is that future generations will be here, and these generations will have to deal with prior generation's irresponsibility. One thing agreeable to all humans is that endangering the lives of fellow humans is not right especially when there are things that can be done now to prevent this like living a life of simplicity and reprioritizing. [...]
[...] Katie Papay, employee of Youngstown State University's (YSU) Recycling Center and President of YSU's Environmental and Animal Rights Coalition, agrees that destroying the environment is immoral; her opinion is that we should respect the environment, because without it we no longer exist. She explains, “People have decided that materialism is more important to them; possessions are what make people feel comfortable and help them ignore what is really going Papay believes, “People don't assess their consequences of polluting or littering, because they are not well informed or aware of the detrimental effects that can result from these destructive actions.” Despite the majority of people's actions, Papay still feels hopeful that people will change their ways; “Every filled recycling bin gives me a little more hope.” The environment is a powerful force driving our progress and survival so without it working properly we only rise to fall. [...]
APA Style referenceFor your bibliography
Online readingwith our online reader
Content validatedby our reading committee