Possible discussion questions: Week 3
Hardin, "Tragedy of the Commons"; Safina, Part 1, "Song for the Blue Ocean"; Normille "Persevering Researchers Make a Splash with Farm-Bred Tuna"; Costello "Can Catch Shares Prevent Fisheries Collapse?"
Note: these questions are possible areas for discussion in response to the "standard" discussion questions that Prof. Temeles included in his email which are fair game for every reading. ("What was the point the author was trying to make?" "How did the author support his/her point?" "What are the strengths of this reading?" "What are its weaknesses?")
1. What are the main points that Hardin's classic article makes? What does he mean by a "no technical solution" problem? What is “the tragedy of the commons?” What does he propose as solutions to this type of problem? Based on Safina, why might such solutions be difficult to implement?
2. Contrast Safina's style with Carson's and Ehlrich's. It may be helpful to again pick a specific passage from Song for the Blue Ocean that seems to be representative of Safina's style. Do you think his style makes his arguments more, or less, persuasive?
3. What role do science and technology play in Safina's narrative?
4. What role does regulation play in Safina's narrative? Does the tuna industry have "mutual coercion mutually agreed upon"? Why isn't it working?
5. The articles by Normille and by Costello present different possible solutions to the tragedy of the commons problem in fisheries. How do these tie in to the solutions posed in Hardin's paper? What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of each? Do you see similarities between the fisheries problem and Carson’s pesticide problem?
6. Hardin writes that “natural selection favors the psychological forces of denial”. Do you think this statement applies to the people in Safina’s book? If so, how?
7. What does Hardin mean by saying that "morality is system-sensitive"? Do you agree? Does this apply to the tuna fishermen? Does Safina take a moral stand or not?