Drastically Different Views on How to Solve the Same Issues

With the issue of sustainability becoming more important, people all over the world are trying to figure out ways to fix the Earth's issues. There are a myriad number of papers that have been written to explain the situation of our world and what people need to do to "develop sustainably" in the future. Two of the most prominent ideas on how to develop sustainably are coined “technological sustainability” and “ecological sustainability.” In their papers, David Orr and John Robinson explain these differing views. Their papers allow, us, the readers to comprehend how drastically different these two methods are in trying to fix/approach the problems of our planet.

“Technological sustainability” is the method of combating the world’s problems with resources by using newly developed tools. As stated in our class, such people don’t think human beings should alter their ways of life. Instead human beings should change the methods of obtaining our needs/wants by creating inventive technical solutions. “Ecological sustainability” is quite the opposite. It is the method of combating the world’s problems with resources by changing the lifestyles of human beings. That is, people who support “ecological sustainability” believe we should solve the issues on scarcity by altering the ways in which people live their lives. We shouldn’t necessarily build new inventions, but instead cut back on the things we use by controlling our wants and needs. These two viewpoints on sustainable development are drastically different, and thus showcase how there are different ways to combat the problems related to sustainable development.

One might wonder why such authors like Orr and Robinson have created this typology. That is, why have these two authors discussed these differing viewpoints on sustainability? I think what they are trying to illustrate is similar to Mr. Boyer’s example between “math” people and “humanities” people. There aren’t only two types of people in our society, but we use the example to show how certain people think differently. Another example could be of the scenario of politics in the United States. We have two major parties, the Republicans and the Democrats. These aren’t the only political ideologies that the American people believe in. We have a whole bunch of people in between these two parties. There are people that are more conservative than Republicans and there are also people that are more liberal than Democrats (Libertarians, Social Democrats as well as Moderates). We use the two political parties to illustrate the drastic differences that exist in people’s personal political ideologies. I think Orr and Robinson do the same when describing sustainable development. Not all people fit into just these two camps of “technological sustainability” and “ecological sustainability", but they exist to showcase the spectrum of ideas that people think and philosophize about sustainability. They use these two extremes to illustrate the different ways people may think about in trying to prepare us for the future. In other words, Orr and Robinson use these two extremes to demonstrate how (just like the contrast between “math” and “humanities people”) different people have drastically different methods/thoughts of fixing the same issue.

Within this spectrum of “technological sustainability” and “ecological sustainability,” there could be many people that are in-between. An example I could think of is a person who uses already existing technologies to develop while also diminishing their insatiable appetite by a little so that they have more humble and simple lives. Such a person wouldn’t change his whole lifestyle and start living in the forests without clothing and modern appliances. Instead they could use less modern appliances and be more appreciative of nature (they could choose to ride a bike to work instead of driving a car). This person also doesn’t need new technologies to develop. Instead they could use existing machines and tools to live (they could choose to fix today’s problems without trying to invent something new to do it with). This isn’t a perfect example, but it is an idea that could exemplify someone who is in-between “technological sustainability” and “ecological sustainability.” Whatever the case and despite the differing views on sustainability, I believe it is important for all human beings to put some thought into the issue of sustainability.