In the article “Diet for a Warmer Planet” Julia Whitty presents two specific ideas: that it is necessary to reduce the global carbon footprint made by humanity in order to prevent adverse climate change and that the most effective way of doing so is to reduce individual consumption as a group so as to meet carbon foot reduction goals and start a cascade of socially driven policies which focus on creating a sustainable means of coexistence with the environment.
Critical Writing on “Diet for a Warmer Planet” Julia Whitty
It is interesting to note that her arguments utilized pathos as a means of appealing to the ethical nature of environmental sustainability while at the same time utilizes ethos as a means of developing the idea that all individuals are obligated towards advocating environmentally sustainable actions.
She does this by utilizing logos as means of presenting numerous concepts and opinions all of which center on group action and the need for consumption reduction.
It is interesting to note that while Whitty does present several valid arguments she does this by presenting them in a misguided fashion that plays on ethos, pathos and logos and twists them in such a way that they create a false impression with readers
One of the first arguments of Whitty focuses on the ethos of the reduction of resource consumption in order to help reduce carbon footprints.
What must first be understood is that while ethos can be the driving force behind movements and ideals the fact remains that ethos itself is manufactured; it comes as a direct result of the need to meet a goal and is put into effect in order to reach it.
The ethos behind the reduction of resource consumption should not be confused as an inherent ethical responsibility, as the author makes it out to be, but rather should be considered as an idea that is being put into effect by a particular group in order to accomplish a certain end.
World Literature ?
This is not to imply that such an idea is wrong but rather the ethos surrounding reducing resource consumption should not be confused between what has been manufactured with what is an inherent human responsibility.
The second argument of Whitty presents the notion that several “authorities” refuse to comment on the effects of climate change due to their assumption that they “don’t know enough” to speak out and as result it becomes necessary for individuals to show www.sitejabber.com their support for climate change initiatives by accomplishing such goals en masse (term for as a group).
This particular argument is based on pathos and is an appeal to the emotions of the readers since it gives the implication that since the experts are unwilling to act it is up to us as individuals to accomplish what they cannot.
The inherent problem with this idea is the fact that there are literally thousands of journal articles and research text which have explored the concept of climate change from as many angles as possible.
A quick query using libraries connected to Jstore and EBSCO Host will clearly show that the “authorities” that Whitty mentions have been far from silent and have actually been hard at work showing the findings of their studies to any who would like to read.
The last argument presented by Whitty is based on logos which in the case of the author acts as a plea towards audiences changing their way of thinking towards resource reduction, collaborative action and focusing on creating environmental sustainability.
She creates this particular argument by presenting facts regarding the effects of climate change, its future implications and the problems parents would leave behind for their children.
While such ideas do have merit they lack concrete evidence specifically showing that nothing is being done. There have actually already been numerous environmental policies which have been enacted as well as policies put into place by companies to help reduce adverse climate effects.
Not only that, since fossil fuels are not a renewable resource, countries and companies are already rushing towards alternative energy research and as such despite the views of the author a lot is already being done.
Based on an examination of the arguments presented in the article it can be seen that the author takes a lot of liberty with her arguments, sometimes a little too much liberty, since the facts presented when compared to what is actually happening are quite far from the truth.