Step 4: Make note of similarities and differences between the two passages.
Think LANGUAGE and ARGUMENTS
Essay Prompt: The two passages below, both written by noted contemporary scientist Edward O. Wilson, appear in Wilson’s book The Future of Life (2002). In the passages, Wilson satirizes the language of two groups that hold opposing attitudes about environmentalism. Read each passage carefully. Then write an essay in which you analyze how Wilson’s satire illustrates the unproductive nature of such discussions.
Step 2: Read the two passages:
Passage 1:
"Well, it's true that the rain forests are disappearing and our planet is facing a massive ecological crisis. But what we must keep in mind is that humans are a part of nature too. We have a right to use and exploit these resources for our own benefit. After all, it's survival of the fittest, and we're just doing what comes naturally."
Passage 2:
"Save the whales! Stop the destruction of our oceans! We must preserve every species, no matter how insignificant. The Earth is sacred and must be protected from the greedy hands of humans. We need to go back to a simpler way of life, in harmony with nature."
Similarities between the two passages:
1. Both passages mention the importance of the environment and the threats it faces.
2. Both passages make reference to the concept of humans being a part of nature.
3. Both passages mention the idea of exploitation of natural resources by humans.
4. Both passages have an overall tone of exaggeration and extremism.
Differences between the two passages:
1. Passage 1 takes a more anthropocentric view, emphasizing the right of humans to use and exploit resources for their benefit, while Passage 2 takes a more biocentric view, advocating for the preservation of all species and a simpler way of life.
2. Passage 1 uses the concept of "survival of the fittest" to justify human actions, whereas Passage 2 emphasizes the sacredness of the Earth and the need to protect it from human greed.
3. Passage 1 uses a more moderate tone, acknowledging the ecological crisis but also suggesting that human actions are natural, while Passage 2 uses a more passionate and urgent tone, advocating for immediate action to save the environment.
Overall, both passages satirize the extreme language and arguments used by opposing groups in discussions about environmentalism. Passage 1 exaggerates the anthropocentric view by justifying human actions based on survival instincts, while Passage 2 exaggerates the biocentric view by emphasizing the sacredness of the Earth and the need to preserve every species. Both passages illustrate the unproductive nature of these discussions by presenting extreme and unbalanced arguments that do not lead to constructive solutions or meaningful dialogue.