Reflections on Three Major Principles I Seek to Live By. 2nd Post
After going on too long on my first principle and prime value, the supreme importance of human personality, I’ll turn now without further comment to offer another of my principles, and that is our responsibility to nature. This could be, in one sense, virtually a sub-principle to the first one, since we, as human persons, not only dwell in nature, we also transform it by the way we use it, sometimes for the better, but sometimes not! So why should we consider ourselves stewards—keepers, custodians—of nature? As noted in a previous post, one reason clearly arises from the evolutionary point of view—i.e. we are (at least as far as I know) the only sentient and prescient creatures able to act based upon an ability to be reflective, able to consider the effect our actions may have on the environment rather than acting simply on genetic impulse or a neurological trigger.
When nature is harmed and misused, persons, in the long run, will be harmed and misused. Environmental responsibility is, therefore, at least a sub-principal, because whatever causes may lie beyond our control, it is virtually certain that human actions are responsible for some critical parts of environmental menaces, such as the following (covered in more detail in my 4th World View post): The depletion of the ozone layer, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, and water pollution. Note that in each of these issues—and others you could add—it is human action or inaction that is a major contributing factor to problems being foisted on the natural world. There are clearly ways that my wife and I try to help but, regretfully, also contribute to these problems. For example, our automobiles are eight and nine years old. We haven’t been able to afford to purchase new hybrid cars, so we are responsible for the environmental damage of automobile exhaust emissions. While we don’t use chemical fertilizers, and we try to use environmentally friendly cleaning products, Terminix, whom we employ for pest control, does use pesticides. Although we weren’t very environmentally self-conscious at the time, when we moved into this recently opened housing sub-division over 30 years ago, we shared responsibility for shrinking the terrestrial habitats of a number of animals—bears, deer, raccoons, possums, for example—which is the reason we see them occasionally wandering about our yard or, in the possum’s case, taking up residence beneath our deck! Thankfully, we contribute less to water pollution, since we use a septic tank for waste and a well for water use. As my friend, Guy Sayles, put it so profoundly, it is our task “to care for creation as a home in which generations after us will live and not as a warehouse of expendable resources for our reckless use.” We need to do better and are trying to do so!
It is also important to note that nature provides many opportunities for enjoyment and adventure, but I will leave that topic to a blog on my values, which will follow at some point.
Another “ditch,” from my own life and career in higher education, would be “academic freedom”—that is, within the boundaries of accuracy and attribution, full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, and freedom in the classroom in discussing subject matter, while striving for rectitude and respect for the opinions of others. I cannot recall when or by what process this became of supreme importance to me, but I know that it was a principle I shared with the President I served under when I came to Mars Hill College (now University) for my first full-time teaching position. His name was Fred Bentley and I will never forget his fierce and public advocacy for and defense of academic freedom, which encouraged me during my years of classroom teaching to be conscious of and speak out against any attempt to infringe on responsible academic freedom. When twenty years later I served with Bentley as VP for Academic and Student Affairs, we were a vocal and protective “team” for academic freedom. It stayed high on my list of priorities for the eleven years I served in that position and remained so in my post-retirement career at Gardner-Webb University as chief academic officer for the College of Arts and Sciences and later as Provost and Senior Vice President.
I wish I could—but cannot—recall a specific incident that required the defense of this principle. I do remember, however, that the most common reason for an attempt to suppress something involved the protection of some religious belief or doctrine that someone thought was being menaced by what was being taught in the classroom or encouraged in student conversation and discussion. Such an attempt at “doctrinal purity” and suppression of religious exploration is both a threat to academic freedom and inconsistent with the Christian identity and educational stance of the institutions I served over a period of forty-five years.
That completes my focus on the three principles I have chosen to address. So finally, the implication of the “dying in the ditch” metaphor is that there are some things I would never compromise. And yet, that isn’t as simple as it sounds. While I don’t personally recall such a situation, there could be times when a confrontation with a strongly held principle might seem to be a legitimate challenge. So, if that should occur, I should determine whether I have principles I feel cannot, under any circumstance, be compromised.
That said, I’m going to wander off, if briefly, “into the weeds” a bit. It’s obviously important to be able to distinguish between principles on the one hand and values, interests, desires, inclinations, etc. on the other, and I hope I have done that. I want to introduce two terms or concepts. One is integrity. If you look up the definition, you will find several, but in the context of my subject, I’ll suggest that that it’s the “moral quality and strength of character that supports and guards my principles.” The other term is duty, which I’ll propose is that “sense of obligation” that can easily be connected to my principles or values, but might also arise from my community, an organization I belong to or support, my family, etc.To put it clearly, is it ever acceptable to compromise my integrity and my principles if it seems that “duty calls” in another direction? Or, even more “tricky,” what if a situation occurs that brings two of my principles in conflict with one another. Is there “a way out” other than compromising one principle or the other? I don’t have an easy answer to the dilemmas I have posed, nor can I recall a time when I faced one of them. But that doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. I beg forgiveness for letting this dilemma “hang” for the time being, because the same issues can arise with respect to one’s values and I will try to bring a reasonable closure to this issue in my next blog on the subject of my values. It also may be, by the way, that when, at my age, I identified a principle as “a ditch I’ll die in,” I was being more prophetic than I knew!
I will try to stay around and I hope you’ll have the patience to stay tuned!
4 Responses
It’s a complex thing, the application of life principles to nature,in the short run nature loses and we see that loss all around and within our own lives. I remember a relative explaining this was all put here for us and it was ours to use, etc . Like you, les and I try but fall short. No hybrid car. A camper. I do believe doing what we can to respect nature is a moral imperative though were always at the edge of destruction.
Thank you so much for taking the time to read this post, Joyce. You are such an incredible writer that I always poise on the edge of gratitude and anxiety when you read my meanderings! That said, I deeply appreciate your comments, pointed and thoughtful, as always. I hope you and Les are doing well.
Earl,
I’ve benefited from, and been challenged by, your reflections on your principles to live by. Thank you. I’m particularly grateful that you chose, at the end of this particular reflection to go, as you describe it “into the weeds a bit,” because your brief emphases on integrity and duty are significant. Closely related, as they are, to clarity of thought and feeling, as well as to courage and action, they are, in some ways the engine of character, I think.
You’ve given, as always, much good stuff to ponder.
Thank you, Guy, as always, for taking the time to plow through my often dense meanderings, and for your kind, insightful and overly generous comments. I appreciate your following me “into the weeds” and finding more to be said there than had occurred to me. It’s not the first time–nor the last, I trust–that I have learned from you when you have dug a little deeper after I laid down my trowel. I hope you’ll never stop! Grace and peace to you, my friend.