Monday, April 30, 2012


Truthfully, I found Jakob Von Uexküll’s study and philosophy of animals a bit peculiar and I was struggling to grasp certain aspects.  Yet this being said, it was definitely interesting to take a sort of assume the roles of his different animal examples and try to understand their world.  One aspect of animal perception that I was happily able to grasp and also found pretty insightful was “the problem of form.”  In his example, Von Uexküll discusses a bumble bee flying to large, open flowers because it prefers “stars and crosses” rather than closed buds which are shaped like “squares and circles.” 

He also goes on to discuss the goals and plans of animals, which was a bit hazier of a concept to me but I will take a shot.  From what I understand, he is arguing for Nature’s plan instead of a goal orientated animal.  For example, the chicken that rescues a peeping chick but cannot notice the same chick when placed under a bell jar, this occurs because of the perception mark of the peep and not because of the goal of the mother hen. 


Well I will take a shot at utilizing Von Uexküll’s philosophies to understand a particular animal, the lovely Wisconsin bird, the robin.  I don’t have much knowledge about these birds but I feel that after seeing them every spring I should know a thing or two.  Thinking about the problem of form with the robin, or any other bird for that matter, would consist of mainly separating obstacles from the open sky and grass.  I would argue that the robin is attracted to open spaces or thin lines, like branches, instead of large masses and buildings. 

This also relates to the way in which Von Uexküll discusses an animal’s space and the effect tones in it.  For example, the robin would likely see maybe two or three effect tones, food or eating, landing and flying.  The robin would see trees or the ground as having the same effect tone, places where they can find worms as having another tone and the sky would have a flying effect tone. 

Lastly, I will briefly explain the robin’s behavior in terms of goal and plan.  One example I can think of, would be interaction with their young.  I would argue that it is similar to the example of the chicken and that a mother robin knows when to feed her young by the perception mark of their cries.  Since the babies’ hunger is marked by noise, the mother knows to feed them as a response. 

Overall, despite the fact that I found Von Uexküll’s analysis of the natural world somewhat difficult, applying it to a specific animal helped me understand his terms further.  While seemingly abstract, his methods do successfully explain and develop sound theories about the animals he observes.  

Sunday, April 8, 2012

Think Twice About Your Food

As a recent, ex-vegetarian and someone still critical of the food industry, the topics this past week have been particularly interesting to me. I have lately been considering going back to my vegetarian ways and all the texts we've read are starting to persuade me. However, after watching Food Inc I have realized that it's not only the meat industry that is severely corrupt. Even when it comes to grains, vegetables and fruits there is an extreme amount of waste and bizarre practices. I was particularly struck by the scene on Food Inc in which they discussed the end of seasons when it comes to produce, which I think we take very little time to think about.

Although, I am particularly inspired by farmers such as the one in the film who raised grass fed animals and did all his own slaughtering. While I was a vegetarian for over 5 years, I have never been against eating meat, I think it's a natural part of the food chain if executed properly. Pollen also touches on this in his essay when he discusses the farm in Virginia which allows animals to "essentially" be themselves. While these animals are still fated to end up on a plate, I can rest easily knowing that an animal was treated humanely, raised naturally and not processed on a factory line.

Speaking of factory lines, I was largely disturbed by the LeDuff article as well as the segment of Food Inc which discussed the same processing plant. To be honest, when I read the LeDuff article I wasn't sure if it was supposed to be fiction or an expose. This was because the information I was reading seemed far too extreme to be true, I didn't want to believe that human beings were being treating as poorly as the helpless animals they were killing, to treat both humans and animals as entirely expendable truly angers me. However, it was the visuals in the film which really hit hard, after seeing the demanding physical work and mental anguish of working in the factory I was straight up mad. Like I said, I have been thinking of going back to my meatless ways and this might be the straw that breaks the camels back.