There are a number of positions regarding the relationship of human beings and food resources in our
textbook. Who has it right (and wrong), and why? A successful essay will explicitly address claims and
positions made by: Malthus; Boserup; Godfray and colleagues; and, Schade & Pimental.
Sample solution
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
Evaluating Perspectives on the Relationship Between Human Beings and Food Resources
The relationship between human beings and food resources has been a topic of debate among scholars and researchers. In our textbook, several perspectives are presented, each offering unique insights into this complex relationship. This essay aims to evaluate the claims and positions made by different scholars, including Malthus, Boserup, Godfray and colleagues, and Schade & Pimentel, in order to determine who has it right and who might have it wrong.
Malthus: Right about Population Pressures, Wrong about Food Production
Thomas Malthus argued that population growth would eventually outpace food production, leading to a catastrophic collapse. Malthus’ theory, known as the Malthusian perspective, has been influential in understanding the challenges of feeding a growing population.
Malthus was correct in recognizing the pressure that population growth can place on food resources. As population increases, the demand for food also rises. However, Malthus’ prediction that food production would not be able to keep up with population growth has been proven wrong over time. Technological advancements, such as the Green Revolution, have significantly increased food production and allowed us to feed a growing population. Additionally, Malthus did not account for the potential for changing consumption patterns, resource management, and the role of social and economic factors in addressing food security issues.
Boserup: Right about Agricultural Intensification, Wrong about Human Ingenuity
Ester Boserup presented a more optimistic view, arguing that population growth leads to increased agricultural intensity and innovation. According to Boserup, as population pressure increases, human ingenuity and technological progress will result in more efficient agricultural practices and higher food production.
Boserup’s emphasis on the ability of human beings to adapt and innovate in response to population growth is valid. In many instances, as populations have grown, agricultural technologies and practices have advanced, enabling increased food production. However, Boserup’s perspective does not fully acknowledge the environmental and social costs associated with intensive agriculture, such as soil degradation, water pollution, and social inequalities. It is crucial to strike a balance between agricultural intensification and sustainability, considering the long-term implications for both the environment and society.
Godfray and Colleagues: Integrating Multiple Perspectives
Godfray and colleagues propose an integrated perspective, acknowledging the complexities and trade-offs involved in feeding a growing population sustainably. They argue that a combination of strategies is needed, including improvements in agricultural productivity, changes in dietary patterns, reduction of food waste, and sustainable resource management.
Godfray and colleagues provide a comprehensive and nuanced assessment of the challenges and potential solutions related to food resources. Their perspective recognizes the need for a multi-faceted approach that considers not only food production but also consumption patterns and environmental sustainability. By integrating various perspectives and strategies, their approach offers a more holistic and balanced understanding of the human-food relationship.
Schade & Pimental: Emphasizing the Importance of Sustainable Agriculture
Schade and Pimental highlight the significance of sustainable agriculture in addressing food resource challenges. They argue for the adoption of agroecological practices that promote biodiversity, enhance soil health, reduce chemical inputs, and improve the resilience of food systems.
Schade and Pimental’s focus on sustainable agriculture aligns with the growing body of evidence that supports the need for environmentally friendly and socially just approaches to food production. By prioritizing ecological principles and reducing reliance on synthetic inputs, sustainable agriculture can contribute to long-term food security while minimizing environmental degradation and preserving natural resources.
Conclusion
In evaluating the perspectives presented in the textbook, it becomes clear that no single perspective has it entirely right or wrong regarding the relationship between human beings and food resources. Each perspective offers valuable insights and highlights different aspects of this complex issue.
Malthus’ concerns about population pressure were valid, but technological advancements have disproven his prediction of food production failure. Boserup recognized the potential for human ingenuity but did not fully consider the environmental and social costs of intensive agriculture. Godfray and colleagues provide a comprehensive and integrated perspective, acknowledging the need for a multi-faceted approach. Schade and Pimental emphasize the importance of sustainable agriculture in addressing food resource challenges.
To address the complex challenges related to food resources, it is essential to consider the insights from all these perspectives. By integrating technological advancements, sustainable agriculture, changes in consumption patterns, and resource management, we can strive for a more sustainable and equitable future where food security is achieved while preserving the health of our planet.
