This point didn’t really need to be made. Intelligent people already know the Earth’s oxygen isn’t threatened by the disasterous crimes going on in Brazil. The majority of humans who are not so smart or well informed will interpret this article to mean there’s really no important consequence to burning the irreplacable ecosystem to provide space for more cattle – a cruel process that is in itself a disasterous activity which consumes huge quantities of water and produces yet more methane. This article, while true, does not serve any positive purpose and contributes to complacency re the status quo.
Very good points.
And, while the author probably has the exact opposite intention, explanations like his reinforce the instrumental value of nature vs. its intrinsic value.
As long as we condemn human activities only when they cause harm to things of instrumental value (e.g., burning a forest is considered bad *only* because it helps us breathe or it shelters plants that cure cancer), we will never get out of the mess we see accelerating in scope all around the world.
Comments are closed.