constructivism

Oh wow. We have constructed ways of thinking of things. These ways of thinking of things have sometimes (often, in fact) created a confusion between cause and effect in environmental phenomena. Things that we conceptualize, like forests, and see being destroyed, are not necessarily dependent only on factors within that physical area. There can be more factors related to human behavior, ecosystems that extend beyond the forest, transfer of pollutants from other sources, etc. which contribute to the health of the forest. It is a human way of thinking to define an area as forest or plain, based on the ratio of grass to tree. It creates a divide between areas, in addition to political divisions, which make it all the more difficult to conceptualize the earth as one system. Examining the historical context in which any concept came to be can help with understanding the complex interactions that our species has had with nature over the millennia.
These thoughts are, hopefully, somehow related to the concept of constructivism. That the very environment that we try to save is simply a constructed idea of humanity. The ideals that we seek are theoretical and may, in fact, have very little to do with how the earth actually functioned.
Constructivism is scary, because how it is described, in some ways seems to discount science as a social phenomenon as well. If that is so, ohhh dear… is there any knowledge to be trusted? The scientific method is so central to our understanding of everything and has already had to go up against religion. In many ways, it is still discounted in certain areas, due to religious beliefs which trump the scientific method. To say that our science is constructed, and based on social and historical values is a very important consideration to take into account, but also a very dangerous one.