Ignorance as a Basic Cause of Environmental Stress

Seven Potential BASIC CAUSES of Environmental Stress

"True wisdom consists in not departing from nature and in molding our conduct according to her laws and model." --Seneca (4 B.C.-A.D. 65), Moral Essays

What we don't know, do know, or think we know about the effects of our actions will influence how we act. Ignorance, knowledge, and perception of reality are related-- as well as relative-- concepts, and hence worth considering collectively as a potential basic cause of environmental stress.

A. Ignorance -- Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. There are many examples of humans degrading the environment through activities that were, at the time, unknown to cause harm.

A notable example is the widespread application of DDT and other chemically-related "pesticides" in the late 1940s and early 1950s. They were acclaimed for killing unwanted organisms, with few, if any, perceived drawbacks. Initially there was no scientific evidence that such substances were injurious to nature and humans. In other words, there was absolute ignorance about DDT's negative effects; and so the chemical's use was unconstrained by knowledge-- not yet discovered-- about it's destructive consequences.

B. Selective knowledge -- But ignorance-- like it's flip side, knowledge-- is relative. Concerning the environmental impacts of a given activity, in society some people may be completely ignorant, others may have slight knowledge, and a few may have great understanding. About every environmental problem, we can say that there is selective knowledge (or selective ignorance).

Typically, scientists or afflicted people are the first to gain knowledge. During the 1950s scientists began discovering how DDT persisted in nature, bioaccumulated in food chains, and injured or killed some carnivores. The great majority of Americans remained ignorant until the early 1960s, after Rachel Carson published Silent Spring. As knowledge increased, ignorance decreased, and accordingly the use of DDT was restricted.

C. Misinformation -- Sometimes we think we know something, but we don't really. If our "knowledge" unintentionally is mistaken, incorrect, untrue or misleading, then we are misinformed. The facts have been corrupted by unintended errors somewhere along communication lines. From the standpoint of actions affecting our life support system, misinformation is more dangerous than ignorance. Why? --Because we are more likely to act on wrong information, satisfied in the belief that we are knowledgeable, than if we realize that we are ignorant and need some facts. True misinformation usually cannot persist long, before someone forces correction, and accurate information takes its place.

D. Disinformation -- Disinformation is information that intentionally is incorrect, untrue or misleading. Disinformation is created for a purpose, not by mistake. Disinformation is not the same as propaganda (see optional reference, Propaganda Analysis, at bottom of this page); whereas propaganda, like disinformation, refers to ideas or arguments spread by deliberate effort, propaganda is not necessarily incorrect, untrue, or even misleading. A simple term for most disinformation is lies.

Because someone has a vested interest in disinformation, it is much more dangerous, insidious, and persistent than mere misinformation. Commonly, the promulgators of disinformation repeat it over and over, to help make it appear true; often they actively counter attempts to correct the disinformation. Such actions tend to perpetuate and prolong the poison of disinformation. Unfortunately, since the 1960s the U.S. has suffered a rising epidemic of disinformation. While most abundant in advertising and "public relations," lies are now commonplace in business, politics, the courts, and personal relations, and they are even invading organized religion, science and education. With the continuously-increasing concentration of media and other businesses into fewer and fewer corporations, there is both greater incentive and opportunity for spreading deception. (Optional: see Oligopoly: The Big Media Game Has Fewer and Fewer Players, 1999, by Robert W. McChesney; 4,200 words)

In regard to our topic of environmental degradation, the amount and importance of disinformation have grown greatly in recent decades. With rising public awareness and concern about the quality of our life support system, the agents of destruction have employed disinformation in order to rationalize publicly-- and hence continue-- their self-serving practices. Such disinformation is intended to hide or disguise activities that harm our environment; for this a specialized term has entered common usage: greenwashing.

E. Greenwashing -- As the name implies, greenwashing is the practice of portraying activities that actually harm environment as being ecologically beneficial or benign. Greenwashing gained prominence in the 1980s, as part of the Reagan-era backlash by business against environmental regulations. In the face of public concern about the environment (gained in the 1970s), major polluters could no longer just ignore their assaults on nature-- so greenwashing was widely adopted. Greenwashing may be achieved in part through public relations ("P.R.") activities, specific advertisements, broader image advertising, and corporate front groups with deceptive names. At best greenwashing is misleading, at worst it is lies.

An example of a corporate front group with a deceptive name-- and employing greenwashing ads-- was the nuclear industry group, U. S. Council for Energy Awareness (USCEA). See USCEA greenwashing ad, 1990: Furry animals as "Citizens for Nuclear Energy". (In 1994 USCEA was absorbed into a new group, the Nuclear Energy Institute, and USCEA ceased to exist as such.)

Greenwashing by corporate front groups with deceptive names is discussed in "Fronting for Business," by Mark Megalli and Andy Friedman (Multinational Monitor, March 1992). [3,200 words]

Propaganda Analysis, home page, Aaron Delwiche, Washington University, 1997 -- Site offers useful discussion, gallery of examples, propaganda techniques, and logical fallacies.

Thomas Detwyler maintains this page (tdetwyle@uwsp.edu)
Last updated 29 January 2001