James and Forum (Please note that my use of CAPITALS is not intended 
to imply shouting, but to replace italics, which are not supported by 
the ecolog-l system.)

I did not intend to imply that there was anything "wrong" with the 
email; on the contrary, I intended to imply that I was STIMULATED by 
it.  I believe that my remarks supported your contention--perhaps in 
excessive detail.  Were my suggestions to be followed (and I am under 
no illusion that they will), students would have that "appropriate 
background," and then some.  My further intended point was that NO 
course should be "soft" in the sense of being superficial or taken 
less seriously than others.  I am more than fully aware that 
mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. are considered "hard," while 
ecology is considered "soft" by the dominant hue and cry, but I think 
they are wrong--seriously wrong.  Ecology should be THE integrative 
science, leading to all the others.  Too few mathematicians and 
engineers and statisticians, for example, have any understanding of 
life at all, living as they do, in an illusory, transitory, "plastic" 
bubble, supported only by the sacking of the earth for its 
entertainment value, ad nauseam.  For example, did you know that, for 
one carat of diamond, something approaching fifty thousand tons of 
earth must be moved, not to mention the human misery and loss of 
habitat, species, and other resources, not to mention so-called 
"indirect" effects such as the release of contaminants affecting 
distant ecosystems?  What if all ecologists and their spouses sold 
their diamonds and ostracized all who don't?  Absurd, of course.  But 
to the point, eh?

WT

At 11:45 AM 11/21/2007, James J. Roper wrote:
>Wayne,
>
>I believe your "soapbox" was because you misunderstood the 
>e-mail.  My point was merely that students must have the appropriate 
>background to take any "higher level" class - especially true for ecology.
>
>Jim
>
>On 11/20/07, Wayne Tyson <<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I share the contempt for "soft" in the sense of sham (for which all
>too many courses, degrees, and institutions qualify),

Reply via email to