Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
With Vogel, With McKibben, Framing Crux:
How would views around food…
With Vogel
-
Systems of corporate agriculture make products specifically for maximized profit without considering the consequences to the workers or the environment.
If any action by humanity is inherently harmful to nature, how can we do anything beneficial to the environment or work toward a solution to our environmental issues?
Pessimism in McKibben's argument, leaves no room for any kind of environmental philosophy because humans can never do anything right for the environment.
-
Vogel would likely analyze hard tomatoes, hard times differently than McKibben
Would perceive flaws with the agriculture industry not on the principle of genetic modification, but because of harm to people/the environment because of their actions.
This gives a framing argument using Vogel significantly more base than one using McKibben, as it relies on evidence of wrongdoing rather than one's own definition of nature
With McKibben
McKibben views things as wrong on principle regardless of how detrimental they may be to the environment
Completely against any kind of genetic modification, regardless of how environmentally sound it may be
The biggest flaw in his argument is the lack of a base-- he views humanity touching nature as wrong simply on principle
-
The concept of leaving nature completely untouched is not able to coexsist with any form of agriculture.
In Hard Tomatoes, "the new Fresh Market Tomato has been specifically modified to be easier to harvest, at the expense of the overall quality and the jobs of those who used to pick the tomatoes by hand" (pg 18).
In Hard Tomatoes, "genetically redesigned, mechanically planted, thinned and weeded, chemically readied and mechanically harvested and sorted, food products move out of the fields and into the processing and marketing stages---untouched by human hands" (pg 18).
Not just genetic modification, but also agriculture in general, goes against McKibben's definition of nature.
-
Framing Crux:
How would views around food differ depending on if McKibben’s or Vogel’s framing was used?