The readings for this week argue with each other about whether or not conservation biologists need to embrace hope and shy away from fear, despair and realism. Swaisgood and Sheppard take the stance that despair can be crippling and that hope is needed for people to continue taking action. They refer to "learned helplessness" and say that people need to know and believe that their actions do make a difference if we expect people to continue to act (Swaisgood & Sheppard, 2010).
This is the perfect set of readings for tomorrow, because tomorrow marks a special day for me in my life. Tomorrow is the first day of the 5th year of FUN Camps, an environmental leadership summer program for kids that I started over 4 years ago. (www.funsociety.ca) When I started FUN Society and its main program, FUN Camps, this was the exact approach that we used, because whether or not there is debate around how to communicate about the environment to conservation biologists, there is no doubt that hope is a necessary ingredient when talking to kids about the environment.
Patten and Smith-Patten don't believe that hope is the answer and in fact they seem to think that the dialogue around hope is promoting a level of dishonesty. In regards to a better future they say that "hope will not get us there, but good science, straight talk, and honest dialogue may. We do not need hope— only the courage to do what is right, regardless of whether we are rewarded." (Patten & Smith-Patten, 2011, p. 426)
First of all, giving people hope does not have to mean lying to them. There are plenty of very valid and honest reasons to be positive and hopeful about the future. The reality of our situation does not have to be ignored even when promoting hope. Also, if kids have no hope, why would they take action? And hope does not necessarily equate with a reward of any kind, unless the reward they are referring to is having a future to look forward to.
According to one definition in the dictionary hope is to have trust and confidence. If children cannot trust that their actions as individuals matter, and they grow up with no confidence in the society that we have created, then why would they put their time and effort into creating a better world? If they already know that their time and effort will do squat to make the world better, then why would they bother? Patten & Smith-Patten advocate that one should do what is right regardless of whether we are rewarded, but how does one know what is right? If we shouldn't have hope, then we can assume that positive actions are not making a difference, therefore making them not the "right" thing to do. Can there even be a right or a wrong in terms of actions, if the cumulative impact of those actions is not large enough to give us a feeling of hope?
Children (like conservation biologists) are already feeling hopeless. So much of what they hear in regards to the environment is fear-based, negative and just plain scary. It is overwhelming and it makes the future seem daunting or worse. This leads to a paralysis. And this paralysis continues into adulthood. This societal paralysis can also be called apathy, inaction, despair... you name it.
When I started FUN Society five years ago I got a phone call from a potential customer who was interested in registering her kids for camp. She asked me if it was going to use a doom and gloom approach. She wanted to know if we would be telling the kids scary facts to try to convince them to act. I told her that our philosophy was the opposite of doom and gloom. Our philosophy was founded in a positive vision and a feeling of hopefulness. Our goal was to show kids that saving the planet can be exciting and fun, and that they are powerful and can impact the world. She was thrilled to hear this and she told me that her kids already knew a lot about environmental issues, because her parents worked in the environmental field and they were very ecoliterate, but that her eight year old daughter was petrified about the future and often cried herself to sleep at night worrying.
I don't know about you, but I don't think that we're going to get anywhere with a generation of eight year olds who have to cry themselves to sleep at night. I would much prefer that they lie in bed full of hope for the future, dreaming up creative ways that we can move towards a society and planet that is better for all of us.
This will be the fifth summer that we are fueling kids with hope, passion and a love for nature. I have to go with Swaisgood & Sheppard on this one, without hope there will not be action. But there are "stories that inspire and encourage, that lift our spirits and justify our efforts." (Swaisgood & Sheppard, 2010, p.627) These are the stories that should be told and that will be told at FUN Camps tomorrow morning. And as a result, this year's kids at FUN Camps will later become these stories that inspire in the future!
Patten, Michael A. & Smith-Patten, Brenda D. (2011). “As If” Philosophy: Conservation Biology's Real Hope. BioScience, 61(6), 425-426.
Swaisgood, R. R., & Sheppard, J. K. (2010). The culture of conservation biologists: Show me the hope! BioScience, 60(8), 626-630.
No comments:
Post a Comment