2.
The idea that humans alone possess a soul
and soul experience appear throughout this piece; the soul being the thing that separates
us from the rest of nature. What are your thoughts regarding humans being the only part of
nature with soul and soul experience?
3.
On page 242 ethical questions 1. What is the
value of this world? How does God will humans to act in relation to the material creation? Are we in but not of the world?
Or are we in and of the world?
4.
On page 244 Christians' spiritual
citizenship ought to make them better residents of the material world… discuss the
social ethical constraints on Christians striving to be in a higher, ‘better’
world than the one in which their body resides.
5.
Discuss Natural Law Hierarchy, “the
whole community of the universe,” Thomas Aquinas' ideas about linkage through man,
God, and the environment. (246)
6.
McFague writes (248) that we should see the
world as God’s body because then everything that happens to the world happens to God,
which seems like a sufficient reason to call Christians to care for the environment.
Discuss.
7.
Berry states, (250) “We deserve a
better world (our destiny) although we had not even begun to appreciate the beauty and
grandeur of this world or the full measure of its entrancing qualities. The failure of
appreciation of the world, what value should Christians place on ecological concerns
– and search for environmental solutions – should they begin within one's own
tradition?
8.
(253) Stewardship ethics: “we are
distinguished from the rest of creation not by our superiority but by our “peculiar
form of individuality and interdependence”…”we are the responsible ones
responsible for all the rest upon which we are so profoundly dependent” People are
responsible because people are capable and dependent – Discuss also knowledge and
capacity for intentional action (254)
9.
Why should humans bear all the
responsibility? (Leopold and Callicott, 257)
10. Could
a stewardship ethic be reasonable for use outside the Christian faith? If not, what ethic
could be used for both? Or, is it best to approach environmental ethics
subjectively?