Analyzing Context

In this blog post I will be addressing 7 questions about the context and perspectives on the Pope speaking about climate change.

Theilmann, Mira "Screenshot from my computer" accessed from
Writers Public Lives 10/29/15

1. Key Perspectives: Environmental activism, liberals, and conservatives

The main concept I am studying is environmental activism and climate change.  The Pope has become an environmental activist, in the hopes of lessening severe climate change across the world.  Becoming an activist entails he believes that humans have had a negative impact on the Earth and should address it for the sake of both the planet and it's inhabitants.  The alternate perspective does not believe climate change can be created by humans, and that there is no problem to address, that can be addressed, or that they want to address.  Due to the Pope being a religious icon speaking to Congress and the UN, the liberal versus conservative perspectives have also come into play.  Conservatives do not want to address climate change, but now, because of the Pope, they have to consider it as a reality.  Liberals are supportive of the Pope, but do not back him wholeheartedly, as the Catholic church is facing some major moral dilemmas of its own and the seperation of church and state still needs to observed.

2. Disagreements

Climate change and the human effect on the planet are at the heart of the issue.  Whether or not the conservatives and liberals can and will work together on a single issue is also a problem.  Judging by the past decades of political strife in the US, it will be a struggle for the various branches of the US government to unite on a single very controversial issue.

3. Agreement

All parts of the government agree that the poor cannot be ignored or treated irresponsibly.  When the Pope argued that serious climate disasters greatly effect the poorest of every country, it is impossible to disagree.  They will have to confront the worst structural and economic damages as a whole compared to those with enough money to lift themselves out of a disaster.  This is the possible uniting factor that the Pope tried to present to Congress and the UN.

4. Ideologies

Whether or not climate change has been created by humans is a serious issue, the general concepts of Catholicism, and whether or not the Pope is in the right mind in addressing the population on such a political issue.   Catholicism has had very controversial views including on abortion, gay rights, and women rights.  Many may ignore the Pope, simply on the principal that he should address those issues first.  Many liberals may also not appreciate such a religious figure having an impact on the political decisions of a country.

5. Specific Text Actions

Many texts start from either believing in climate change or not, or come from a liberal or conservative bias.  There is not often any middle ground.  Articles choose one side or the other to write on, because there is such a divide in the political sphere on the environment.

6. Useful Perspectives

I will use my background in the sciences, knowledge on climate change, and my perspective as a young college student to my advantage.  My science background gives me at least a minimal understanding on how negatively humanity can effect the environment and how important addressing our lifestyles can be.  Being a young college student allows for a bit of understanding from the older audiences.  I do not have decades of experience in the world, simply because of my age.  While this might limit my credibility, it also allows for a lot of creative room.  Supportive audiences will hopefully enjoy seeing the opinion of a fresh voice in a saturated issue.  I also am not writing for a magazine or news source, which allows for my argument to be entirely my own.

7. Harmful Perspectives

My useful perspectives can very easily morph into my greatest threats.  Being a young college student with little experience could result in my audience believing my argument is void.  Being an environmental science major with a heavy bias, also can decrease my credibility.  If I keep the tone and voice professional and my information credible, these difficult perspectives can remain my advantage.

REFLECTION:

After reading Chelsea's and Sam's blogs, I realized I definitely wrote a lot, as per usual.  However, I wasn't exactly sure where I was going with the purpose of my article, and this particular blog definitely helped identify that.  Chelsea and Sam wrote very clear blogs that defined their parameters and context within their purpose.  They look like they both have a very clear direction for their projects.  Mine is still a little up in the air and will need some work-shopping.