One notable feature of natural systems is the fact that they are generally problem free. Each system exists for a particular purpose and it functions within the larger purpose exactly as it is designed, if I may use that term, to function. This appears to have been the case until humans arrived on the planet. As I noted in an earlier blog humans have had a greater impact on the earth than any other species. The changes we have brought have not always been positive. Some species have undergone significant pressures because of human activity. In response to these pressures we have sometimes embarked on programs to preserve endangered species. A significant, though seemingly irrelevant, point of these programs is the fact that humans are the ones who determined that these species were endangered. Our conclusions are limited to those species we can observe and we have acted only in those cases where we have determined that our actions contributed to these species being in an endangered state.
I have raised this as an issue because we have similarly determined that our species is in peril. We have taken to saying that the planet is in peril but we are really referring to the human species. We may be able to affect the planet's capacity to support life but nothing we can do will lead to the destruction of the planet itself.
Not only have we decided that our species is in peril, we have determined that we must do something to reverse the trend. This raises several issues. How do we know that the species is in peril? It is possible that what we are going through is just a part of the cycle of our development or evolution. If this were to be the case, how wise is it for us to interfere with the natural cycle?
I will attempt to address this in the next blog.
A systems level discussion on Organizational Leadership and World Peace written by:
© Darius A. Lecointe, Ph.D., J.D., M.A. Join in the discussion here or through dalecointe@gmail.com
3 comments:
Could it be that humans believe themselves to be the most evolved of all species inhabiting the earth and as such have the responsibility to "decide" who is endangered and who is not? If a competing lifeform is threatening the existence of humans and where they live, it might be deemed necessary to subdue or wipeout said lifeform....
That's an interesting point. It is one thing to do this as individuals but our concern is regarding our actions as a species. If any species is a threat to humans it would be the result of prior human action. Consequently, we would need to be careful to consider the impact of wiping out that species would have on the sustainability of humans.
An example that comes to mind is human expansion into areas where wildlife usually occupies... humans hunt sometimes to extinction any animal that threatens their desire to life in a certain area.... humans seem not to embrace the concept of sharing resources with others. Remember the buffalo......
Post a Comment