Unit 8A - Saving Nature, but Only for Man
Protecting nature certainly has benefits, but it has costs as well. How are we to balance the two when deciding how far we should go in caring for the environment?
Saving Nature, but Only for Man
Charles Krauthammer
Environmental sensitivity is now as required an attitude in polite society as is, say, belief in democracy or aversion to nylon. But now that everyone has claims to love Mother Earth, how are we to choose among the dozens of conflicting proposals, restrictions, projects, regulations and laws advanced in the name of the environment? Clearly not everything with an environmental claim is worth doing. How to choose?
There is a simple way. First, distinguish between environmental luxuries and environmental necessities. Luxuries are those things it would be nice to have if costless. Necessities are those things we must have regardless. Then apply a rule. Call it the fundamental principle of sensible environmentalism: Combating ecological change that directly threatens the health and safety of people is an environmental necessity. All else is luxury.
For example: preserving the atmosphere, by both protecting the ozone layer and halting the greenhouse effect, is an environmental necessity. In April scientists reported that ozone damage is far worse than previously thought. Ozone reduction not only causes skin cancer and eye cataracts, it also destroys plankton, the beginning of the food chain on top of which we humans sit.
The reality of the greenhouse effect is more speculative, though its possible consequences are far deadlier: melting ice caps, flooded coastlines, disturbed climate, dried up plains and, ultimately, empty breadbaskets. The American Midwest feeds the world. Are we prepared to see Iowa acquire Albuquerque's climate? And Siberia acquire Iowa's?
Ozone reduction and the greenhouse effect are human disasters. They happen to occur in the environment. But they are urgent because they directly threaten man. A sensible environmentalism, the only kind of environmentalism that will win universal public support, begins by unashamedly declaring that nature is here to serve man. A sensible environmentalism is entirely man-centered: it calls for man to preserve nature, but on the grounds of self-preservation.
A sensible environmentalism does not sentimentalize the earth. It does not ask people to sacrifice in the name of other creatures. After all, it is hard enough to ask people to sacrifice in the name of other humans. (Think of the public resistance to foreign aid and welfare.) Ask hardworking voters to sacrifice in the name of the snail darter, and, if they are feeling polite, they will give you a shrug.
Of course, this man-centeredness runs against the grain of a contemporary environmentalism that worships the earth to the point of excess. One scientific theory -- Gaia theory -- actually claims that Earth is a living organism. This kind of environmentalism likes to consider itself spiritual. It is nothing more than sentimental. It takes, for example, a highly selective view of the kindliness of nature. My nature worship stops with the May storms that killed more than 125,000 Bengalis and left 10 million homeless.
A non-sentimental environmentalism is one founded on Protagoras' principle that "Man is the measure of all things." Such a principle helps us to fight our way through the jungle of environmental argument. Take the current debate raging over oil drilling in a corner of the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. Environmentalists, fighting against a bill working its way through Congress to permit such exploration, argue that we should be conserving energy instead of drilling for it. This is a false either/or proposition. The country does need a substantial energy tax to reduce consumption. But it needs more production too. Government estimates indicate a nearly fifty-fifty chance that under the ANWR lies one of the five largest oil fields ever discovered in America.
We have just come through a war fought in part over oil: Energy dependence costs Americans not just dollars but lives. It is a ridiculous sentimentalism that would deny ourselves oil that is peacefully attainable because it risks disrupting the breeding grounds of Arctic reindeer.
I like the reindeer as much as the next man. And I would be rather sorry if their mating patterns are disturbed. But you can't have everything. And if the choice is between the welfare of reindeer and reducing oil dependence that gets people killed in wars, I choose man over reindeer every time.
Similarly the spotted owl. I am no enemy of the owl. If it could be preserved at no or little cost, I would agree: the variety of nature is a good, a high aesthetic good. But it is no more than that. And sometimes aesthetic goods have to be sacrificed to the more fundamental ones. If the cost of preserving the spotted owl is the loss of livelihood for 30,000 logging families, I choose family over owl.
The important distinction is between those environmental goods that are fundamental and those that are merely aesthetic. Nature is our charge. It is not our master. It is to be respected and even cultivated. But it is man's world. And when man has to choose between his well-being and that of nature, nature will have to accommodate.
Man should accommodate only when his fate and that of nature are bound up together. The most urgent accommodation must be made when the very integrity of man's environment -- e.g. , atmospheric ozone -- is threatened. When the threat to man is of a lesser order (say, the pollutants from coal- and oil-fired generators that cause death from disease but not fatal damage to the ecosystem, a more moderate accommodation that balances economic against health concerns is in order. But in either case the principle is the same: protect the environment -- because it is man's environment.
The sentimental environmentalists will call this saving nature with a totally wrong frame of mind. Exactly. A sensible -- a humanistic -- environmentalism does it not for nature's sake but for our own.
参考译文——为了人类自身拯救自然
保护大自然固然裨益良多，但代价也不菲。当我们决定在保护环境方面应该走多远的时候，该如何协调这两者间的关系呢？
为了人类自身拯救自然
查尔斯·克劳特哈默
环境意识，就如同对民主制度的信奉，或是对尼龙的厌恶，已成为当今上流社会一种必备的态度。可是，在人人都有权利热爱地球母亲的情况下，面对以保护环境的名义而提出的许许多多相互冲突的建议、限制、规定、工程和法律，我们该如何选择呢？很显然，并不是每一件声称保护环境的事都值得去做。那我们该如何选择呢？
有一种简单的选择方法。首先，要区分是出于对环境的奢侈追求还是出于环境保护之必需。对环境的奢侈追求指的是那些如果不需花费代价则不妨拥有的事物。环境保护之必需指的是无论花多大的代价我们都必须做的事情。然后，再运用一条法则。姑且称之为理智环境保护论的基本原理：遏制直接危害人们健康与安全的生态变化，是环境保护之必需。其他一切均为奢侈追求。
例如：通过保护臭氧层和遏止温室效应来保护大气层是环境保护之必需。科学家们在4月份报告说，臭氧层破坏之严重远远超出过去的估计。臭氧的减少不仅导致皮肤癌和白内障，而且摧毁浮游生物，那是我们人类赖以生存的食物链的第一环。
温室效应的现实情况是怎样目前难以确定，但可能产生的后果破坏性更大：冰帽融化，海岸线被洪水淹没，气候反常，平原干涸，进而最终粮仓空匮。美国中西部是为全世界提供粮食的地方。我们是否愿意眼看着爱荷华州出现阿尔伯克基的气候，而西伯利亚则出现爱荷华州的气候呢？
臭氧减少与温室效应都是人类的灾难。两者恰好都属于环境的范围。但这两种情况都很紧迫，因为它们直接威胁着人类。理智的环境保护论，亦即惟一能赢得公众普遍支持的环境保护论首先坦然指出，大自然是为人类服务的。理智的环境保护论完全是以人为本的：它呼吁人类保护自然，但其目的是自我保护。
理智的环境保护论对地球不感情用事。它不要求人们为其他生物做出牺牲。毕竟，要人们为他人作牺牲都难而又难。（想一想公众对海外援助和福利救助是何等的抵制。） 如果你要求勤劳的选民为蜗牛鱼做出牺牲，客气一点的，也就对你耸耸肩而已。
当然，这种以人为本的做法与当前一种过分崇拜地球的环境保护论格格不入。有一种科学理论，即盖亚理论，就声称地球是个有生命的机体。这种环境保护论喜欢自诩为崇高而纯洁。究其实不过是感情用事。比如，它在看待大自然的仁慈时往往好事尽记，坏事皆忘。本人过去也崇拜自然。但自5月风暴夺走了125,000多孟加拉人的生命，留下1,000万人无家可归以后，我的自然崇拜也就不复存在了。
非感情用事的环境保护论是建立在普罗泰戈拉的“人是一切事物的尺度”的原则之上的。这一原则能帮助指点迷津，引导我们杀出环境保护的混争。且以目前要不要在阿拉斯加国家野生动物保护区一角开采原油引发的激烈争论为例。环境保护论者极力反对一项正在设法想获得国会通过的开采提案，他们争辩说，我们应该保护能源，不应该开采它。这一种非此即彼的提法根本站不住脚。美国的确需要对能源课以重税以减少消费。但我们也需要更多地生产石油。政府估计几乎有对半的可能，在阿拉斯加国家野生动物保护区之下蕴藏着美国迄今为止发现的五大油区之一。
我们刚刚经历了一场部分是为石油而进行的战争：对能源的依赖使美国人不仅付出了金钱的代价，更有生命的代价。荒唐的感情用事使我们用不上可以和平获得的石油，只因为那有可能破坏北极鹿的繁殖地。
我和别人一样喜欢北极鹿。如果它们的交配规律被打乱，我会深感遗憾。但你不可能什么都要。如果要在北极鹿的安乐和减少石油依赖以使人们免于战争的屠戮之间做出选择的话，我永远都将舍鹿取人。
对斑枭也一样。我无意与斑枭为敌。如果能够不付代价或以极小的代价保护斑枭，我也赞成保护：自然的多样性是一件好事，是美学上的一大好事。但也仅此而已。有时美学上的好事不得不为那些更为基本的好事做出牺牲。如果保护斑枭的代价是30,000户伐木工丧失生计，那我宁要民生不要斑枭。
这里有一个重要的区别，就是基本的环保善举与仅具美学意义的环保善举之间的区别。自然归我们掌管，它不是我们的主人。自然理应得到尊重甚至抚育。但人类是这个世界的主宰。当人类不得不在自身的福祉与大自然的裨益两者之间取舍时，大自然就得通融了。
人类只有在自身命运与大自然的命运紧密相连时才应该将就自然做自身调整。人类在居住环境的健全——如大气臭氧层——受到威胁的时候必须做出最紧迫的调整。如果对人类的威胁相对较小（如燃煤或燃油发电机排放的使人致病致死，但对生态系统并不带来致命伤害的污染物），应该权衡经济发展和人类健康而进行适度调整。但不管哪种情况，基本原则是一个：保护环境——因为这是人类的生存环境。
感情用事的环境保护论者会将这种对自然的保护称之为心态完全错误的自然保护。完全正确。理智的——人本主义的——环境保护论不是为大自然保护环境，而是为我们自己保护环境。
New Words and Expressions:
environmental
a. （自然）环境的
environment n.
sensitivity
n. 敏感（性）
belief
n. 信念，信仰；相信
democracy
n. 民主（制度）
conflicting
a. being in disagreement, collision, or opposition 不一致的，冲突的，矛盾的
conflict vi.
proposal
n. sth. proposed 提议，建议
restriction
n. sth. that restricts, such as a law or rule 限制；限制性规定
regulation
n. an official rule or order 规章；规定
in the name of
for the reason of; using the excuse of 以…为由，以…为借口，以…的名义
distinguish
v. recognize the difference (between) 区别，辨别
regardless
ad. in spite of everything; anyway 不顾一切地；无论如何
fundamental
a. of the basis or foundation of sth. 基本的，根本的
environmentalism
n. 环境保护论；环境论
combat
v. fight or struggle (against) （与…）斗争，战斗
ecological
a. of ecology 生态的；生态学的
atmosphere
n. 大气；气氛
ozone
n. 臭氧
layer
n. a single thickness of a material covering a surface 层
reduction
n. making or becoming less or smaller 减少
cancer
n. 癌，恶性肿瘤
cataract
n. 白内障
plankton
n. 浮游生物
reality
n. 现实；真实
speculative
a. 猜测性的，推测的
consequence
n. the result or effect of an action or condition 后果，结果
deadly
a. causing or able to cause fatal injury or serious damage 致命的，毁灭性的
melt
v. (cause a solid to) become liquid （使）融化，（使）熔化
urgent
a. calling for immediate attention 紧急的；急迫的
universal
a. 全世界的；普遍的，全体的
unashamedly
ad. without showing guilt or embarrassment 坦然地，满不在乎地
man-centered
a. 以人为中心的，只考虑人类的利益的
call for
require, demand 要求
on the grounds of/on…grounds
for reasons of 因为；以…为理由
self-preservation
n. 自我保护
sentimentalize
vt. treat or consider in a sentimental way 感情用事地对待（或看待）
creature
n. a living being, especially an animal 生物（尤指动物）
resistance
n. opposition 反对，反抗
voter
n. 投票者，（法定）选举人
vote
v. express one's choice in favour of (a person or political party) at an election 投票选举
snail darter
n. 蜗牛鱼（一种濒临绝种的很小的淡水鱼）
run/go against the grain (of sth. or to do sth.)
be contrary to one's inclination, desire, or feeling 与（…）格格不入；违反意愿（做某事）
contemporary
a. current; modern 当代的，现代的
worship
n., vt. 崇拜；崇敬
to the point of
to a degree that can be described as 达到…的程度
excess
n. more than the reasonable degree or amount 过节，无节制
organism
n. 生物体，有机体
spiritual
a. of the spirit as opposed to matter 精神的；非物质的
nothing more than
just the same as; only 无异于；只不过，仅仅
sentimental
a. 感情用事的；多愁善感的
selective
a. of or characterized by selection 选择的；有选择性的
Bengali
n., a. 孟加拉人（的）；孟加拉语（的）；孟加拉的
jungle
n. 杂乱无章的事物；（热带）丛林
current
a. occurring in or existing at the present time 当前的，现在的
debate
n. 辩论；争论
rage
vi. continue with great force; be intense 激烈地进行
wildlife
n. wild animals and vegetation, especially animals living in a natural state （总称）野生动物（尤指野生动物）
refuge
n. a place providing protection or shelter 庇护所；避难处
work one's way
manage to reach or go through; make efforts to attain one's goal 设法抵达（或获得通过）；努力达到目标
congress
n. 国会；立法机关；代表大会
exploration
n. the act or an instance of exploring 勘查，探测；探索
conserve
vt. protect from loss or harm; preserve 保护；保存
either/or
a. 只能两者择其一的
proposition
n. 提议；命题
consumption
n. the act of consuming; the amount consumed 消费（量）
come through
experience, survive or overcome (a difficulty, etc.) 经历；从（…中）活下来（或挺过来）
in part
to some extent; partly 在某种程度上；部分地
dependence
n. the state of being dependent 依靠，依赖
ridiculous
a. absurd 可笑的，荒谬的
sentimentalism
n. 感情用事；多愁善感，感伤主义
deny
vt. refuse to grant or allow 不给；不准
attainable
a. that can be reached or achieved 可达到的；可得到的
attain
vt. 达到；取得
disrupt
vt. throw into confusion or disorder 使陷于混乱；干扰
breeding ground
动物繁殖的地方
breed (bred)
v. bear, produce (young) （使）繁殖；产（后代）
reindeer
n. （单复同）驯鹿
Arctic
a., n. 北级（的），北极圈（的）
mate
v. （使）交配
similarly
ad. in a similar way 同样地，相同地
owl
n. 猫头鹰
aesthetic
a. 美学的；美感的；美的
livelihood
n. a means of living 生计
logging
n. 伐木业
log
v. cut down, trim, and haul (timber) 砍伐；伐（木）
distinction
n. difference 区别，差别
charge
n. a person or thing committed to the care of another 被照管的人（或事物）
well-being
n. the state of being healthy, happy, or prosperous 幸福；福祉
accommodate
vi. adapt 适应新的情况；迁就
vt. 容纳，向…提供住处；协调
accommodation n.
fate
n. 命运，结局
bind (bound)
vt. tie or fasten; tie together 捆，绑；将…绑在一起
e.g. (abbr.)
for example 例如
atmospheric
a. of, relating to, or existing in the atmosphere 大气的
threat
n. 威胁
lesser
a. smaller in amount, value, or importance 较小的，更少的，次要的
pollutant
n. something that pollutes 污染物
generator
n. 发电机
fatal
a. causing death; bringing ruin 致命的；毁灭性的
ecosystem
n. 生态系统
moderate
a. not extreme; within sensible limits 适中的；适度的
concern
n. 有利害关系的事，关心的事，担扰
frame
n. state, condition; basic structure around which sth. is built 状态；框架，构架
frame of mind
mental attitude or outlook 心绪；心境
humanistic
a. of humanism or humanists 人本主义的，人文主义的
Proper Names
Charles Krauthammer
杰尔斯·克劳特哈默
Midwest
美国中西部
Lowa
（美国）爱荷华州
Albuquerque
阿尔伯克基（美国新墨西哥州城市）
Siberia
西伯利亚（俄罗斯一地区）
Gaia
（希神）盖亚（大地女神）
Protagoras
普罗泰戈拉 （c. — c. B.C.，古希腊哲学家）
Alaska
（美国）阿拉斯加州
Language sense Enhancement:
. Read aloud paragraphs - and learn them by heart.
2. Read aloud the following poem:
The Beauty of Nature
James Teh
One cool evening, I put aside all duty,
To sit alone, watching the sun set,
And as I do, I think of scenes filled with beauty,
Scenes I wish to never forget.
I think of the beach, with the sand and the sea,
The waves roaring up, then gently lapping the beach,
The cries of the seagulls, so happy, so free,
It only men realized the lesson it can teach.
I think of a lake, the crystal clear water,
So pure, so smooth, and cool on my skin,
The air, so clean, no toxic slaughter,
There's a key, a lesson held within.
I think of a waterfall, water freely flowing,
The gentle gush, gurgling in my ears,
The wind on my face, calmly blowing,
So many have not learnt in so many years.
The sunset, the beach, the lake, the waterfall,
They're things of nature, not man-made at all,
Characteristics unbeatable by man have they all,
They're peace and beauty, both of which it seems men want to fall.
. Read the following quotations. Learn them by heart if you can. You might need to look up new words in a dictionary.
Complete adaptation to environment means death. The essential point in all response is the desire to control environment.
—— John Dewey
完全适应环境意味着死亡，所有对环境的响应中最重要的一项就是控制环境的欲望。——约翰·杜威
We won't have a society if we destroy the environment.
—— Margaret Mead
如果我们毁坏了环境，社会也就不复存在。——玛格丽特·米德
We make the world we live in and shape our own environment.
—— Orison Swett Marden
我们创造了我们所居住的世界, 同时也塑造了我们自己的环境。——奥里森·斯韦特·马登
When man is happy, he is in harmony with himself and his environment.
—— Oscar Wilde
当一个人很快乐的时候，他便处在一种自身与环境的和谐之中。——奥斯卡·王尔德
.Read the following joke for fun:
Man: how many environmentalists does it take to change a light bulb?
Woman: Ten. One to install the new bulb and nine to figure out what to do with the discarded bulb for the next 1,000 years.
参考资料：
扫一扫
1万+
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
