Euan and Ecolog:
Uhhh, I dunno, but I suspect that "the public" resents exclusion and other
forms of disrespect just as intensely as do scientists and other academics
and "intellectuals."
First, you have to open the door. The primary deficiency (oh, hell, there
are so many "primary" deficiencies, that must be wrong) is the closed-door
that separates the intellectual from the anti-intellectual.
"Anti-intellectualism" certainly exists, along with a host of other
expressions of fear, but as long as self-styled intellectuals, some of them
scientists, even ecologists slam doors in the faces of "the public," it will
not decline. Biodiversity might be a perfectly reasonable term for the
phenomenon of complex species assemblages and ecosystems, but understanding
the term might be less important than understanding their ups and downs and
requirements and limitations. Translating that for "the public" might be
more important than finding a new term. "The Public," given due respect,
just might be capable of rising above or extending beyond, sound bytes and
terminology. Vacuums tend to be filled eventually.
The phenomena related to misunderstanding and confusion and resistance to
understanding might benefit (or be screwed up) by a disciplined examination
of the evidence. I doubt that extended hyperbole will have much effect.
WT
PS: The public's ignorance of biodiversity's real meaning might not be the
first step toward understanding what life is all about; stimulating
curiosity and responding to enquiry once it is sparked might be the bridge
that would be crowded by the multitudes once they are beckoned by the
gatekeepers. I remember my astonishment when the project manager of an
ecosystem restoration project upon which I was working was astonished when I
inadvertently "revealed" to her that chaparral was a term for a vegetation
type, not a single species of plant. She and I both made leaps out of our
respective ignorances that day, and I have since tried to be more
considerate of the potential for even "clear" terminology to foster
unwarranted conclusions. I have since learned and re-learned that
terminology that conveys clarity to the "ins" may be quite inadequate with
respect to the "outs." United in the quest toward greater and greater
understanding, specialists and generalists may yet be able to compound their
strengths rather than to diminish each other.
As to a space-holder "definition" of bio-diversity (maybe the hyphen should
be left in?) for "public" consumption, one might say that biodiversity, at
root, means that life forms are almost uncountable and uncounted, and each
is in a process of seeking good places and good associates, just as we
humans form interdependencies and encounter limitations in the business of
living, dying, and changing. However, I'm sure some will come up with much
better responses to Ritchie's most reasonable request.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ritchie, Euan" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 3:05 PM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Defining biodiversity, and does the term capture the
public's attention?
Hi everyone,
I have just returned from the Ecological Society of Australia meeting and
among other issues, there was much discussion about the term biodiversity.
Many people argue that this term is hard to define, and importantly, the
public have no idea what it actually means and therefore they have less
connection/concern to preserve/conserve species and habitats. I thought it
would be interesting to hear how others define biodiversity, and if this
term isn't helpful for conveying the importance of species diversity to the
public, what term(s) should we use?
Over to you,
Euan
Dr. Euan G. Ritchie, Lecturer in Ecology, School of Life and Environmental
Sciences
Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia.
Building T, Room T3.09.3
Phone: 03 9251 7606 International: +61 3 9251 7606
Mobile: 041 888 2992
Fax: 03 9251 7626 International: +61 3 9251 7626
Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Skype: euanritchie
Website: http://www.deakin.edu.au/scitech/les/staff/ritchiee/
Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code 00113B
Important Notice: The contents of this email are intended solely for the
named addressee and are confidential; any unauthorised use, reproduction or
storage of the contents is expressly prohibited. If you have received this
email in error, please delete it and any attachments immediately and advise
the sender by return email or telephone.
Deakin University does not warrant that this email and any attachments are
error or virus free.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.449 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3313 - Release Date: 12/13/10
07:35:00
