> Received: from csf.Colorado.EDU by aim1.bus.ryerson.ca (Mercury 1.1); > Sat, 9 Nov 96 5:41:22 GMT+3 > Received: from host (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/ > Received: from icicle.winternet.com (icicle.winternet.com [198.174.169.5]) by > sf.colorado.edu>; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 15:26:03 -0700 (MST) > Received: (from adm@localhost) by icicle.winternet.com (8.7.5/8.7.5) id QAA07 > 179 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 16:26:02 -0600 (CST) > Received: from ppp-66-63.dialup.winternet.com(204.246.66.63) by icicle.winter > net.com via smap (V2.0beta) > id xma007054; Fri, 8 Nov 96 16:25:27 -0600 > Message-Id: <v03007800acc6898b492a@[204.246.66.112]> > Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 16:26:02 -0600 (CST) > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Precedence: bulk > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Indistinguishability vs. expanded self > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.1 -- ListProcessor by CREN > X-PMFLAGS: 34078848 > > Hello all! I am a new member to this list, my name is Kari. I am currently= > studying Ecofeminism in my environmental ethics course and have gotten= > stuck on a few issues. I though, perhaps, those on this list could possibly= > > help me out. I am studying a piece by Val Plumwood entitled "Nature, Self,= > and Gender:Feminism, Environmental Philosophy, and the Critique of= > Rationalism". What a facinating piece it is , however I am confused about= > her case that she makes about criticizing Deep Ecologies "indistinguishabil= > > ity account" in which everything is part of everything else. Plumwood feels= > > that we need to identify our human distinctness in order to achieve care= > and understanding of all other things. She then goes on to talk about the= > expanded self and how it is an enlargement and extension of the ego= > allowing for a wider set of interests and concerns. I am not able to see= > the real difference between these two "selves". If anyone has any insight= > on this , it would be greatly appreciated. thanks! Kari > > Kari: I'm taking the liberty of responding to you because I too, am working my way through Plumwood (whom I really admire). While I don't feel I can really clarify your issue too well,here goes: As humans we are distinct from animals - we can reflect on ourselves and the world around us and by doing this we not only distinquish ourselves from other sentient beings but can care for and understand other 'animals' with feeling; a process that results in expanding oneself. By the expanded self, we enlarge our understanding through the process of self-reflection as we relate to the world of other beings; and this is our first (not lower level)"self"; the self that can care for other things through greater understanding. The consequence of the process produces the expanded self (or the second self)- like the container that facilitates the first self to expandeded/ greater levels of a caring being. Are you more confused? If you would like to continue a discussion, my e-mail is : [EMAIL PROTECTED]; or Ryerson Polytechnical University 350 Victoria St., Toronto, Ontario M5B 2K3. Yolanda Coppolino >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 12 06:28:41 1996 Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 13:28:16 +0000 (GMT) From: Stokely Webster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Indistinguishability vs. expanded self In-Reply-To: <v03007800acc6898b492a@[204.246.66.112]> I think my understanding of Plumwood differs slightly; I come to her via her book _Feminism and the Mastery of Nature_ (or is it _Woman &c_?) which is excellent. Dare I say, the best account of ecofeminist philosophy. Anyway, my understanding of Plumwood was that the 'expanded self' is an objectionable notion precisely because it leads to indistinguishability - that is to say a failure to realise and respect difference. I do not think she would be happy to allocate humans a privileged distinctiveness from any other aspect of the world. >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 15 05:34:58 1996 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:31:15 +0000 (GMT) From: Leonie Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re:Tampons To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi I am doing a dissitation on the lifecycle analysis of a tampon. I have alot of info on the health effects on women but very little on the environmental effects during manufacture. Any one have any bright ideas? Thanks Lee
