Erik Buckingham                                                         approximately 200 words

ekb7@geneseo.edu

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

William Cronan and Seuss Spruce Graff & Berkenstein Arguments

By: Erik Buckingham

Most people will tell you that a waterfall in the woods is wilderness, but the grass and trees behind their house is lesser. I wholeheartedly endorse William Cronan’s claim that if wilderness, “can start being just as humane as it is natural, then perhaps we can get on with the unending task of struggling to live rightly in the world” (Cronan, 109). The Seuss Spruce’s imperfection is the core of its beauty. Its curved trunk symbolizes the positive neglect of a grounds crew after a harsh storm.

Adding to Cronan’s argument, I would point out that we can neglect nature while coexisting with it. After the storm, Geneseo laid gravel pathways and set up metal benches in the Seuss Spruce’s surrounding area. Cronan’s theory that a person with empathy and an innovative mind can experience wilderness anywhere (Cronan, 108) sheds light on the difficult problem of whether or not the college should trim the Seuss Spruce. If we have successfully built a quad around the tree, why can’t we learn and live with the Seuss Spruce growing freely? When we stop struggling to live rightly, we learn to coexist with the unconventional.

Erik Buckingham                                                         approximately 200 words

ekb7@geneseo.edu

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

William Cronan and Seuss Spruce Graff & Berkenstein Arguments

By: Erik Buckingham

            Most people will tell you that a waterfall in the woods is wilderness, but the grass and trees behind their house is lesser. I wholeheartedly endorse William Cronan’s claim that if wilderness, “can start being just as humane as it is natural, then perhaps we can get on with the unending task of struggling to live rightly in the world” (Cronan, 109). The Seuss Spruce’s imperfection is the core of its beauty. Its curved trunk symbolizes the positive neglect of a grounds crew after a harsh storm.

Adding to Cronan’s argument, I would point out that we can neglect nature while coexisting with it. After the storm, Geneseo laid gravel pathways and set up metal benches in the Seuss Spruce’s surrounding area. Cronan’s theory that a person with empathy and an innovative mind can experience wilderness anywhere (Cronan, 108) sheds light on the difficult problem of whether or not the college should trim the Seuss Spruce. If we have successfully built a quad around the tree, why can’t we learn and live with the Seuss Spruce growing freely? When we stop struggling to live rightly, we learn to coexist with the unconventional.

Hunter Cowles                                                                               About 150 words

INTD: Science Writing

In Bruno Latour’s paper, “We Have Never Been Modern,” he breaks down the various domains that together, complete our society. By viewing each of these categories as independent subjects, and by not letting your beliefs in one cross over into another, one can draw conclusions in a “pure” and unbiased manner. Latour uses the hole in the ozone layer as an example. He states ” Companies are modifying their assembly lines in order to replace the innocent chlorofluorocarbons, accused of crimes against the ecosphere… I discover that the meteorologists don’t agree with the chemists; they’re talking about cyclical fluctuations unrelated to human activity.”  This excerpt reveals that two groups (chemists and meteorologists) have contradictory theories on what is causing our environmental crisis.

Latour also correlates secularization to modern beliefs and why our society can operate the way it does successfully. Religious bias interferes with science, law, and other departments. If we find a way to overcome our personal convictions aside, we will be able to give our undivided attention to the issues at hand.

Logan Steffens                                                                             Approx. 150 words

lts6@geneseo.edu

In “ We Have Never been Modern by Bruno Latour, he describes a world in which man and nature are two entirely separate things while in reality we are one in the same. Similar to a newspaper with its many articles about similar topics us humans are one topic in the large umbrella that is all of nature. Latour suggests that we have two goals as a society, purification that is keeping humans separate from nature and translation, which is creating labels for everything around us. The rock outside of Suffolk hall can be viewed as part of nature or as part of human civilization when in reality it is both. However, few people think this way because we are so modern and do not understand that humans are part of nature similar to everything around us.

Emma Cooke                                                                 Approximately 150 words

erc8@geneseo.edu

INTD 105 Science Writing

“We Have Never Been Modern”

Bruno Latour’s essay “We Have Never Been Modern” focuses on the way in which knowledge is shared in our modern world. “By all means, they seem to say, let us not mix up knowledge, interest, justice and power lead us not mix up having an earth, the global stage and the local scene, the human and the nonhuman” (Latour 3). According to Latour there are three distinct approaches to discussing our world: “naturalization, socialization and deconstruction”. Throughout he speaks of modernity and how the way in which certain groups of people think change how they choose to compartmentalize information. His hypothesis surrounds this idea, that there are those who practice “translation” and mix beings, creating hybrids and those who practice “purification” creating zones of human and nonhuman which are distinctly different.

This can be connected to Sturges Hall in the way that people look at it differently. Some view the hall as a hybrid between human and nonhuman, with its ivy covered walls, while others view it as a human construct, and see the careful grooming of the ivy around the windows as another separation between human and nonhuman.

Aubrie Cross

INTD: Science Writing

ac46@geneseo.edu

We have never been Modern

In Bruno Latours piece, We have never been Modern, he discuses the dichotomy between human culture and nature. In his paper he says “Modernity comes in as many versions as there are thinkers or journalists, yet all its definitions point, in one way or another, to the passage of time.” What Latour is saying here is that over time the idea of being “modern” has changed as well as it has multiple meanings but they’re all relatively the same. Later on he says that in order to really be “modern” then we have to realize the distinction between his two dichotomies which were the work of purification and the work of translation. However, Latour then says that if we look at both simultaneously then we stop being wholly modern. After he says that the reason for this is because ‘these two sets of practices have already been at work in historical practices which is coming to an end.’ I can see some of Latours ideas in my mini essay when it comes to the relationship between human culture and nature, however, I don’t fully see his ideas connecting to The Greek Tree.

Racheal Devine                                                      About 150 words

INTD Science Writing

rmd20@geneseo.edu

Response to “We Have Never Been Modern”

Taking worlds issues and major events Bruno Latour starts his essay about modernism and the meaning of being modern. He says, “The word ‘modern’ designates two sets of entirely different practices which must remain distinct if they are to remain effective, but have recently begun to be confused.” One being translation, as in new beings or hybrids and the other purification, with two groups human and non humans. Each not being able to work correctly without the other. This dichotomy between the human culture and nonhuman nature of purification and then again between the purification and translation is what makes us modern when they are kept separate. He states that if we pay attention to both then “we immediately stop being wholly modern” and that then our past would change also. Then leaving us with a final question, what we are going to become if they are not separate, and his response is that we will have to slow down, regulate the proliferation and represent the monster’s existence.

I don’t really see this connection back to my mini essay.

Matt Klein                                                            approximately 180 words

mgk6@geneseo.edu

INTD 105-19: Science Writing

We Have Never Been Modern Response

By Matt Klein

In his book We Have Never Been Modern, Bruno Latour analyzes the divisions that modernity has constructed between man and nature. While ancient societies made no distinctions between these, “modern” culture has separated the fields of science and sociology discrete groups. Latour defines his idea of modernism at the end of the first chapter. In order for modern society to “remain effective,” we must “[designate] two sets of entirely different practices which must remain distinct.” These practices are “translation,” which creates hybrids of nature and culture, and “purification,” which separates humans and nonhumans. While this seems paradoxical, Latour argues that both must exist in order us to become truly modern.

The Arboretum seems like a valid example of the practice of translation since it combines both nature and culture. I’m curious about how it has been viewed in the local media though, specifically whether or not it has been viewed as a separate part of campus unrelated to any other or if it has been discussed along with other aspects of the Geneseo culture. This would be a good point to research for my final essay.

Erik Buckingham                                                        approximately 150 words

10 MacVittie Circle

Geneseo, New York 14454

ekb7@geneseo.edu

“We Have Never Been Modern” Response

By: Erik Buckingham

In the New York Times, a few pages about biological and chemical advancement are listed under “science times” while political articles are seen throughout the whole newspaper. Author Bruno Latour’s views on modernisms stem from this separation of politics and nature.

In “We Have Never Been Modern”, Latour states that, “the analysts, thinkers, journalists, and decision makers will slice the delicate network… into tiny compartments where you will find only science, only economy, only social phenomena, only local news…”Latour believes that the more separate we keep our research in social and natural science, the more we will discover reasons to combine the two. He states, “the more we forbid ourselves to conceive of hybrids, the more possible their interbreeding becomes.”

The Suess Spruce is a tree that stands for perseverance, intertwining it with biology and society. This is a paradox because we are at a college that separates biology and sociology into two separate departments.

Daniel Biskup                                                                        Approx. 180 words

INTD 105

djb29@geneseo.edu

Latour’s argument begins by presenting an article on the depleting ozone layer in Antarctica, in order to give a lens in which to look through. He then goes on to explain the distinct areas that are affected, both science and politics. This mixing of the two within one issue makes it nearly impossible to view it from one stance because it takes away from the other, and yet it is also impossible to look through both simultaneously.

This scope gives way to Latour’s main argument in which he ponders on humanity’s own idea of modernity and where present day stands. Are we in the present day premodern, truly modern, or postmodern. The argument is based around two dichotomies, one separating human culture and nature, the second separating the first and hybridization of the two. In order to anthropologically analyze our current state both hybridization and separation must happen simultaneously and yet once this happens we stop being wholly modern. His point is paradoxical in that both must happen otherwise neither could take place, leaving it ambiguous on our state as human beings.