Human Traditions II Final

I believe that anthropocentrism, the belief that humans are valued above any other life
form, doesn’t promote human-nonhuman relationships. I think that putting humans at the center of the world disregards the many life forms that will come before and after us. It also disregards the many that walk beside us and share the bounties that Earth and God give us, equally. Believing this is egotistical and ungrateful and I would never see myself supporting it. Such a self-centered and negative belief affects the way humans respect non-human life forms by disregarding the greatest thing that has been given to us: life. The probability of anything being born is so low, the fact that we have oxygen and trees and water and a sustainable planet at all is enough to be grateful for. But anthropocentrists have taken the idea of sustainability and wrung and twisted justice from the very fabric it’s been woven from. I will not delve into primordial chemistry, but the probability of being born at all is so low, to not acknowledge and rejoice in every living thing is for the foolish and arrogant.

I took in my own fish after she would have been abandoned by her previous owner last
Summer because of the deep faith I have in the fact that everything is born equal. I could have left her to die in a small tank with fin rot and algae bloom. But I took her in because as much as I changed her life, she changed mine. I was a depressed mess alone in my dorm with nothing to do, but seeing her swim up to the glass to meet me with black eyes that reflected my own- perhaps she thought I was her God. But I look at her the very same way, with devotion and with respect.

I wrote in my college essay about how as a child I would save the bugs in every pool I’d
visit and then swim because it would put me at ease. “When I was a kid, I was always drawn
towards saving the bugs in pools. Despite an armada of my friends always telling me to forget about the bugs, that they were lost causes; I had a plan born out of injustice that said I’d insist on saving them. The little creatures would curl up in my hands like tiny fists protesting against death.” I wrote with such respect that it felt like a birth right. To respect one living thing, no matter how small, is to be grateful that we can live together as a collective, human or nonhuman, and as one interconnected web. Through anthropocentrism there is a heavy disregard of ecosystems and a lean on exploitative practices.

To me, an example of anthropocentrism would be the main theme brought up in the
article “ETHICS: THE WE AND THE I” by V. F. Cordova. The article comments on how “The
West, both Christian and secular, is, in general, offended when humans are compared to bees and ants.” which implies a non-respect for animals because “The vision of a human as a naturally social being calls up images of “the mindless herd” or “the mass mind” or “the unthinking masses” which can be swayed by a powerful leader.” Unlike in other cultures that Cordova talks about, where “To say to a Western person, for example an American, that he is “not like other Americans” is usually taken as a compliment, whereas in other cultures to single someone out as a being “unlike” others of his group can be a cause for unease” which implies there is a hierarchy that westerners place themselves on the top of. While the goal that humans should be striving for instead would be seen through the article “Speaking of Nature” by Robin Kimmerer which comments on how the ladder is better to practice since it doesn’t put humans on a hierarchy above other species. Kimmerer brings up giving everything pronouns as a form of identity, saying “Names, names, names: the stones seem to say, “I am. You are. He was.” Grammar, especially our use of pronouns, is the way we chart relationships in language and, as it happens, how we relate to each other and to the natural world.” Kimmerer also enforces equality throughout the article, which supports my argument that anthropocentrism is for the ungrateful.
An anthropocentric viewpoint would disregard the use of pronouns for non-humans, which is disrespectful to all non-human species. Anthropocentrism plays a positive role in establishing a respectful relationship in Kimmerer’s commentary, and a negative role in Cordova‘s.

I can’t help but side with Kimmerer, I’d willingly throw all my money down a wishing
well if it meant every wish I have was a desire like the one I have for justice. Anthropocentrism tells humans that animals have a right to meet our wishes and desires without considering their own, we take elephant tusks and tiger ligaments for our illnesses without trying to remedy theirs. We exploit habitats for our own gain, and we take away from the many animals that deserve to use resources just as much as we do.

Anthropocentrists don’t draw a line for their greed and their selfish rapacity. In fact, their
belief that humans are both above of all animals and at the center of the universe they’ve built upon the lost lives of ravaged habitats extends beyond them; with a viewpoint so small minded this way of thinking perpetuates inequality and injustices towards marginalized communities, as anthropocentrism reinforces the idea that certain groups of people are superior to others based on race, gender, or nationality.

Anthropocentrism is an exploitative, selfish practice.