To expand on the idea: "evil" is not a concept that scientists would use, but it is ingrained in the public mind -- as it should be, as it simply means that which society does not, or should not, accept. Every society must have standards of what is or is not acceptable, and these become the definitions of "good" and "evil." Part of our problem, then, is in the fact that science is descriptive, whereas society is prescriptive.
For instance: when we speak of threats to biodiversity -- i.e. that which reduces biodiversity below what it would otherwise have been. Scientifically, can we speak of "optimal" biodiversity or "optimal" productivity? Both the high and low ends of the productivity spectrum tend to have relatively lower biodiversity (e.g., barren sand dunes; a eutrophic pond); but whereas ecology, as a science, can describe these phenomena, it has a more difficult time making statements as to what "should" be. Shall we speak in terms of benefits to humans, i.e. ecosystem services? Shall we speak in terms of what will allow evolution to proceed with the least interference? Shall we accept the proposition that humans are irrevocably an evolutionary force, and develop an ethics for our influence on evolution? The answers to these questions are not really scientific ones. Jason Hernandez ________________________________ Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 13:59:47 -0700 From: Beyhan Titiz <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Rethinking of Values in Ecology > Hello All, > > Recently, I watched the movie "Moneyball" even though I am absolutely > clueless about baseball. The movie has not changed this fact however, the > underlying story was fascinating, especially if you are familiar with the > concepts and books of Michael Lewis. The main point that I took away was > about the importance of asking the right questions about a well-established > "game", and redefining the concept(s) of value using math and appropriate > statistics. When values are misidentified in a game such as baseball, the > consequences are almost invisible; the games are still played, players are > still traded, hotdogs and tickets are still sold. There are just wrong > choices of players that is considered as unfortunate picks by dinosaur > scouts. This movie inspired me to think about the primary values defined in > Ecology. What are those values that function in Ecology and/or communicated > to societies? When values are misidentified in this discipline, what > happens? The closest example I can think of is the shift in understanding > "evil" invasive species which are believed to be coercing ecosystem changes > but in fact may be valuable indicators of what is going on in a system. > I would love to hear your thoughts. > > Sincerely, > > *Beyhan Titiz Maybach, PhD > University of Denver, Colorado > <http://www.beyhanmaybach.com>* > -
