While Kyle Madsen brought to light some intriguing
counterarguments, there is one in particular I would like to address. Madsen states, “This intense angle of vision
may leave out some readers. For example,
I am left wondering why gardening is less effective than, say, converting to
solar power.” As I know very little
about the scientific aspect of solar power (and I am fairly certain the common
reader does not understand it fully as well), I cannot accurately compare its
effectiveness or emissions with those of fossil fuels in a way that I feel
comfortable. Thus, I opted the avenue of
a more local approach.
Not all readers may have the
financial means to convert to solar power, but the majority of the population
can plant their own food. While I used
gardening as a topic throughout the paper, I also mention other examples of
simple ways to contribute, such as abstaining from power for a day or giving up
meant. I was not intending to make
claims that other avenues are not effective, nor was I stating that gardening
is the most effective avenue for change. Rather, as I stated, “The idea is to find one thing to do in your
life that does not involve spending or voting, that may or may not virally rock
the world but is real an particular.” This is what I hope readers took from my
article, and I hope in this way they feel compelled to alter their lives minutely
so that a collective change will take place.
No comments:
Post a Comment