Supporters of cooperation with nature. Social studies lesson on the topic “Protecting nature means protecting life”

Description of the presentation by individual slides:

1 slide

Slide description:

Macrophere 1. “Donbass is my native land” Microsphere “I am a resident of Donbass” Topic 4. Protecting nature means protecting life

2 slide

Slide description:

OBJECTIVES: To identify the features of nature and its relationships with humans in our region. Continue environmental education students.

3 slide

Slide description:

4 slide

Slide description:

EXPECTED RESULTS Ability to identify features of nature and relationships with people in our region; give them a reasoned description.

5 slide

Slide description:

PEOPLE'S ATTITUDE TO NATURE: Supporters of the opinion of domination over nature: Man is the king of nature. A person can dispose of natural resources as he wants. Nature is hostile to humans, so it must be constantly conquered.

6 slide

Slide description:

PEOPLE'S ATTITUDE TO NATURE: Supporters of the opinion of cooperation with nature: Man is a part of nature. Nature gives man its riches. Man must study the laws of nature. Nature is home for humanity.

7 slide

Slide description:

ECOLOGICAL MORALITY: Every person needs to learn to act in such a way as not to harm environment.

8 slide

Slide description:

TASK No. 1 The assertion that nature is hostile and indifferent to people is characteristic of supporters of: 1) cooperation with nature; 2) domination over nature; 3) respect for nature; 4) moral attitude towards nature;

Slide 9

Slide description:

TASK No. 2 Main meaning environmental morality: 1) do not harm the environment; 2) satisfy human needs; 3) enjoy life; 4) create a comfortable lifestyle;

10 slide

Slide description:

11 slide

Slide description:

12 slide

Slide description:

“THE GOLDEN RULE OF MORALITY” Morality is the rules of good behavior. Let's now think about whether the rules of morality apply to man's relationship to nature. For example, if you did something bad to another person, morality condemns you and says that you committed an evil act. And if you do something harmful to nature, can we say that you have done evil? Can your action be called immoral, immoral?

Slide 13

Slide description:

“THE GOLDEN RULE OF MORALITY” You may already have an answer, but take your time. The question is not as simple as it seems. The fact is that people have long had different attitudes towards nature. There are supporters of domination over nature. They believe that man is the king and ruler of nature and can dispose of its riches as he pleases. They also like to repeat that nature is hostile and indifferent to people. In order for it to serve a person, it must be constantly conquered, forced to work for oneself, and moral rules exist only for people and do not apply to nature.

Slide 14

Slide description:

“THE GOLDEN RULE OF MORALITY” But there are other people who support cooperation with nature. They consider humans to be part of nature and do not agree that nature is hostile and indifferent to people. Everything is just the opposite, they believe: nature generously and unselfishly gives people everything it has. You just need to work hard to better understand the laws of nature and not break them, otherwise nature may punish you. Proponents of cooperation believe that moral rules should extend to man's relationship with nature.

15 slide

Slide description:

“THE GOLDEN RULE OF MORALITY” Let's take the main rule of morality - the golden rule - treat people the way you want them to treat you. Supporters of cooperation with nature argue that in our time, when serious environmental problems have arisen caused by unreasonable human economic activities, we need to learn to relate to nature in a new way. Therefore, the golden rule of morality should be supplemented and include attitude towards nature. Then it turns out that not only people, but also nature need to be treated the way you want it to treat you.

16 slide

Slide description:

“THE GOLDEN RULE OF MORALITY” Everything is very simple and clear: you want it not to happen environmental disasters, learn to treat nature like a human being, responsibly. If you don’t learn, you will be in terrible trouble. This new attitude towards nature began to be called environmental morality. The main meaning of environmental morality is to learn to act in such a way as not to harm the environment or do harm to it.

Slide 17

Slide description:

THREE MAIN RULES OF ECOLOGICAL MORALITY I personally bear responsibility for the conservation of nature. I will not harm any living thing - a flower, a tree, a bird, an animal. And, of course, to the person. I will help any life I can help - a flower, a tree, a bird, an animal. And, of course, to the person.

18 slide

Slide description:

LIVED IN THE WORLD A MAN Albert Schweitzer (1875 - 1965) was an outstanding philosopher and doctor, German by birth, although he lived and worked not only in Germany, but also in France. He was a very gifted and hardworking man who knew how to work 20 hours a day and sleep 3-4 hours. His character was amazing. From the very early age Albert strived for good deeds. One day a friend called him to shoot birds with a slingshot. The proposal seemed disgusting to Albert, but he went so that his friend would not laugh at him. And when they were already lying down near a tree with carefree singing birds, the ringing of church bells was heard. Albert perceived this ringing as a voice from heaven. He decisively threw away the slingshot and scared the birds to save them. So he fulfilled the moral rule “do not kill” and applied it to living beings.

Slide 19

Slide description:

A MAN LIVED IN THE WORLD After graduating from university, thanks to hard work and perseverance, Schweitzer quickly achieved recognition and became a famous philosopher and musician in Europe. And suddenly he changed his life dramatically. One day in the newspaper he read a call for help, which said that doctors were really needed in distant Africa. And Schweitzer decided to go there. But for this you had to become a doctor. And he, already an adult, entered the Faculty of Medicine. And having learned, he left for Africa. There, in the small town of Lambarene, he built a hospital with his own money and treated the sick until the end of his life.

20 slide

Slide description:

LIVED IN THE WORLD But Schweitzer could not remain only a doctor. Late evenings When the last patient left, he sat down to write his works on philosophy and worked almost until the morning. It was here in Africa that he began to think about a new environmental morality. He expressed the main idea of ​​his teaching literally in three words - reverence for life. And before any life, not only before human life. Killing a flower, the philosopher believed, is the same as killing a person. Therefore, a person acts truly morally only when he helps any life and tries not to harm all living things.

21 slides

Slide description:

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS: -What features of Schweitzer’s character can you note? -Why did he decide to change his life and go to Africa? -What does it consist of? main idea his teachings?

22 slide

Slide description:

HUMAN IMPACT ON NATURE: ·The famous writer Valentin Rasputin believes that the loudest word, even louder than war and disaster, has become the word ecology. “It’s surprising,” says the writer, “but it sounds the same in all languages ​​of the world. And it expresses the same thing - an understanding of a universal misfortune that has never before existed on such a scale and severity...” Where did this misfortune come from? And why did it become universal?

Slide 23

Slide description:

WHAT IS ECOLOGY? Ecology is the science of the relationships in nature of plant and animal organisms with each other and with the environment. The environmental crisis is associated with man's unreasonable attitude towards nature, its pollution and destruction. Social ecology is a field of science that studies the relationships between human society and the environment.

24 slide

Slide description:

HISTORY PAGE: With the advent of man, it is he (man) who begins to have a decisive influence on the fate of many living creatures on the Earth. And this influence can be not only positive. Hardly hunting, gathering, main activities primitive man, were environmentally harmful. In addition, there were no more people on Earth then than today there are inhabitants of just a medium-sized city. But over time, man's relationship with nature began to change.

25 slide

Slide description:

PAGE OF HISTORY: Recalling the history of the development of human economic activity, one should say about the discovery of fire, the emergence of agriculture, cattle breeding, the transition to a sedentary lifestyle, etc. - speaking about the development of the productive economy, as well as about man’s ability to be creative, thanks to which he created and will create something new that does not exist in nature - “second nature”: cars, cities, factories, power plants, as well as science and art.

26 slide

Slide description:

Slide 27

Slide description:

PRICELESS GIFT OR INEXHAUSTLESS PANTRY? Unfortunately, we cannot claim that all people always behave responsibly. Even you have behaved like this more than once. Let's draw a portrait without responsible person. You can recognize him by his behavior. He is selfish and rarely shows concern for others, and is generally indifferent to the fate of nature. For him, nature exists only to take something from it. He may not be evil or mean, but he is frivolous. Yes, and not rich in intelligence.

28 slide

Slide description:

PRICELESS GIFT OR INEXHAUSTLESS PANTRY? Modern environmental scientists believe that a person, carried away by rapid economic activity, did not notice how he began to destroy and destroy nature. Great scientific and technical discoveries turned his head. He suddenly decided that he had finally conquered nature and became its king and ruler. With the greed of a conqueror, man attacked natural resources, which seemed to him inexhaustible: he mercilessly cut down and continues to cut down forests, pump out as much oil and gas as he wanted, extract countless minerals from the bowels of the Earth, use any amount of fresh water, etc.

Slide 29

Slide description:

PRICELESS GIFT OR INEXHAUSTLESS PANTRY? At the same time, of the various raw materials that are mined annually in the world, only a small fraction benefits humans. Imagine that your mother baked a large raisin pie, and you picked out only one raisin from it and threw away the rest. Horror! Isn’t it terrible that of all the extracted raw materials, only 1-2% of the initial mass is processed into the final product, the remaining 98-99% goes to waste. And so every year!

30 slide

Slide description:

PRICELESS GIFT OR INEXHAUSTLESS PANTRY? And what has man done to the animal world! For example, have you ever spotted a sea cow? Didn't see it. And you will never see. But it was a wonderful animal that lived in the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. 10 meters long and weighing 4 tons, its character was harmless and trusting. Man destroyed it for its meat, fat and skin. The same sad fate applies to the quagga zebra, blue horse antelope and hundreds, hundreds of other animals and birds. This is how the “black book” appeared - it lists animals that we will never see again, but this was also a priceless gift of nature!

31 slides

Slide description:

PRICELESS GIFT OR INEXHAUSTLESS PANTRY? Of course, a person needs to have raw materials. But modern science warns: one should remember the great ecological rule: one cannot demand more from nature than it is capable of giving. This means that in order not to cause trouble, you need to study the laws of nature. For example, we must take into account that all natural resources (they are also called “resources”) are divided into two groups – exhaustible, that is, those that in the future can be “exhausted” to the end, and inexhaustible.

32 slide

Kvass Anna, 9th grade

You already know that morality

Download:

Preview:

Environmental morality or rules of good behavior

You already know that morality These are the rules of good behavior. Let's now think about whether the rules of morality apply to man's relationship to nature. For example, if we did something bad to another person, morality condemns us and says that we committed an evil act. And if we do something harmful to nature, can we say that we have done evil? Can our action be called immoral, immoral?

You may already have an answer, but take your time. The question is not as simple as it seems.

The fact is that people have long had different attitudes towards nature. Eatsupporters of domination over nature.

They believe that man is the king and ruler of nature and can dispose of its riches as he pleases. They also like to repeat that nature is hostile and indifferent to people. In order for it to serve a person, it must be constantly conquered, forced to work for oneself, and moral rules exist only for people and do not apply to nature.

But there are other people -supporters of cooperation with nature. They consider humans to be part of nature and do not agree that nature is hostile and indifferent to people. Everything is just the opposite, they believe: nature generously and unselfishly gives people everything it has. You just need to work hard to better understand the laws of nature and not break them, otherwise nature may punish you.

Proponents of cooperation believe that moral rules should extend to man's relationship with nature.

Let's take the main rule of morality -The golden rule is to treat people the way you want them to treat you.. Supporters of cooperation with nature argue that in our time, when serious environmental problems have arisen caused by unreasonable human economic activities, we need to learn to relate to nature in a new way. Therefore, the golden rule of morality should be supplemented and include attitude towards nature. Then it turns out that not only people, but also nature need to be treated the way you want it to treat you.

Everything is very simple and clear: if you want there to be no environmental disasters, learn to treat nature like a human being, responsibly. If you don’t learn, you will be in terrible trouble.

This new attitude towards nature began to be called environmental morality. The main meaning of environmental morality is to learn to act in such a way as not to harm the environment or do harm to it.

Three main rules of environmental morality:

1. I am personally responsible for preserving nature.

2 . I will not harm any living thing - a flower, a tree, a bird, an animal. And, of course, to the person.

3. I will help any life I can help - a flower, a tree, a bird, an animal. And, of course, to the person.

Ethical teachings that preceded ecoethics were based on the premises that, despite all human activity, nature and its systems remain unchanged; actions aimed at the non-human world must remain ethically neutral; all traditional ethics was basically anthropocentric.

With the intensification of economic activity in Ancient Greece in the public consciousness there was a process of separation of gods from nature. Human activity increasingly acquired the character of utilitarian use. There is a search for norms of human behavior in the world of man himself. Accordingly, in the classical period of ancient culture, a new attitude towards nature began to take shape. In late antiquity, the Romans demonstrated the ability to use natural resources to their advantage. They were considering natural environment as if it were one of the provinces they had captured.

In worldviews eastern sages nature turns out to be a huge animal, endowed with its own will and developed nervous system. Influenced by these views, the famous Japanese specialist in molecular biology D. Ikeda put forward the idea that sooner or later the entire Earth should be recognized as a superorganism. According to Buddhism - all in one, one in all. Ancient Chinese society encouraged an observant attitude towards nature. Man in such a society tried to penetrate as deeply as possible into the essence of the natural world and use energy sources in nature, minimizing his interference in natural mechanisms.

Implementation of the principle of "wu wei" (non-interference) leaves things alone, allows nature to take its own course, benefits from the nature of things without changing them, gives knowledge of how to do without interference. The term “wu wei” is a great rule of Taoism that permeates the Eastern worldview.

In the Japanese religious tradition of Shinto there are no moral precepts, standards of righteous behavior or warnings against sins. Shinto was born out of the deification of nature. A feature of the traditional attitude towards nature in Japan is the concept of “Man is a child of nature.” The Japanese term for nature (sōzem) means “to be as it is” or “to be in harmony with the environment.” The Japanese have never opposed themselves to nature. It was the Shinto faith that instilled in them sensitivity to nature, the ability to enjoy its endless changeability, and rejoice in its many-sided beauty.

In the Middle Ages, spiritual life was determined by biblical standards. They called on a person to live in self-denial in order to go to heaven. The main features of man's relationship to nature, which is inherent in the Judeo-Christian tradition, are the opposition of man's spirit to his body, the idea that God has sanctioned man's dominion over all living beings.

IN modern world natural factors have value only in the context of the progressive development of humanity. The object of moral assessment and regulation is not nature itself, but the attitude towards it.

Environmental ethics studies the moral attitude of man to nature with the aim of humanization and harmonization in the system of relations “man - nature”, “society - nature”. The main property inherent in environmental ethics is due to the fact that concern for natural conditions existence of future generations.

Environmental ethics poses the question, essentially paying attention to the ideological problem. What is the meaning of human existence in the Universe and the Universe in man? A specific refraction of this fundamental ideological problem is the question: should the principles of environmental ethics be based on recognition of the intrinsic value of natural systems? Or is the object of moral assessment and regulation not nature itself, but the attitude towards it?

Recently, such a formulation of the question would have seemed far-fetched, since it was clear to everyone that nature was given to man in its natural form, it existed long before the emergence of man himself and continues to exist independently of him. However, nowadays it is believed that the system of social values ​​should include not only phenomena public life, but also natural phenomena that make up the natural environment of society.

The former anthropocentrism has exhausted itself and, due to its one-sidedness, has become a serious obstacle to overcoming the environmental difficulties of mankind, since if a person continues to focus attention on himself and his needs, then the nature he destroys will take revenge on a person for insufficient attention to its needs.

References

1. Bganba-Ceres V.R. Environmental ethics. - M.: Mysl, 1998.

2. Bganba V.R. Social ecology. - M.: graduate School, 2004.

3. Bganba-Ceres V.R. The formation of environmental ethics. – M.: SK “Sfera”, 1992.

5. Vasilenko L.I. Attitude to nature as moral problem// Ecology: Ways of survival and development of humanity. - M.: Mir, 1998

6. Girusov E.V., Mamedov I.M. Ecological culture. Culture: theories and problems. – M.: Prospekt, 2002.

• What kind of person is called moral?
• What is the golden rule of morality?
• Do moral laws apply to man's relationship to nature?
• Is it possible to call moral person destroying nature?

What does it mean to treat nature as a human being?

Far from main roads and settlements, in the depths of the Tver forests, there lives one wonderful family. She is surrounded wildlife. And almost complete silence. People talk in whispers, but more often with gestures.

They almost always wear gloves on their hands, and their faces are hidden by hoods. Don't think that these are hunters or hermit monks. No, these are the famous biologist Pajitnovs - husband and wife, and their son helps them. They work at the state biological station “Clean Forest”. Their task is to save newborn cubs.

Unfortunately, tragedies often happen in the forest: a mother bear dies while hunting or is killed by a poacher’s bullet. There remain babies doomed to death. Only these people can save them. And they pick up, day and night they feed and nurse the still blind cubs no worse than their own mother. And after some time, stronger and more mature, they are released back to

The Pajitnovs' work requires patience, caution, and ingenuity. After all, we need to make sure that the cubs don’t get used to people and don’t even see their faces. Having parted with biologists, the animals must become completely independent, otherwise they will not survive in natural conditions.

Why do you think scientists abandoned city life and settled in the deep forest? What particularly struck you about the life and work of scientists?

What motivates the Pajitnovs to lead such a difficult, one might say heroic, lifestyle? After all, it was not for the sake of money that they doomed themselves to loneliness and seclusion - they receive the usual modest salary of scientists. This means that we need to look for another reason, some deep motivation, an inner feeling.

You probably already guessed that we are talking about responsibility. How important is this? moral quality- responsibility! Thanks to the work of responsible people who honestly perform their duties, bread is grown, factories, schools, hospitals operate, houses are built, food and clothing are produced, science is developed, and nature is preserved.

A responsible person always actively, persistently, persistently does something good and useful. He worries about those around him and tries to take care of them. And one more very important feature of a responsible person: he tries to foresee the consequences of his action in advance, so as not to harm anyone.

Now let's return to the Pajitnov family. Scientists are doing a good, useful thing, they are worried and care about the bear cubs, and, if you look more broadly, about the conservation of the brown bear in Russian forests. And at the same time, they think through their every step in advance, understanding that the slightest inaccuracy can turn into disaster. Scientists are guided by a high moral sense of responsibility to nature, to other people and to their own conscience.

This is the kind of responsible behavior we call a truly human attitude towards nature. It helps to protect and preserve the life of nature, and therefore all life in general.

Serious consequences of irresponsibility

Unfortunately, not all people behave responsibly. When terrible forest fires burned in Russia in the summer of 2010, firefighters and scientists argued that main reason The fire was caused by a human factor, in other words, human irresponsibility.

Now let’s remember N. Teleshov’s fairy tale “The White Heron”. It talks about Princess Isolde, who lived in the North, on a lonely island. She was beautiful and kind. The time has come to get married, and the princess began to prepare an unprecedented wedding dress. She wanted the dress to look like snow, and the headdress to resemble arrows of frost. The court seamstress undertook to sew the dress, but no one could make the headdress. Finally, a mysterious old man came to Isolde and said that white herons lived far in the south. Every spring, a white crest grows on their head, tall and lush. If you take out the tuft and attach small diamonds to it, you will get exactly what the princess dreams of. Only for this you need to kill the bird.

Isolde flatly refused. And at night she could not sleep. She thought that there are many birds in the world and if you kill only one, nothing bad will happen. The princess told the old man to hit the road. And then he returned and silently handed Isolde white branches strewn with sparkling diamonds.

• Did you kill her? - Isolde asked anxiously.
• Yes, he killed and cut off the crest. Then I took it to the best jeweler in the world and told him about your request.
• “Thank you,” replied the princess. Her hands were shaking.

At the wedding, Isolde looked beautiful in her elegant outfit. But the fairy tale does not end there. One night, two white herons came to Isolde, either in a dream or in reality. They told her a terrible story. It turns out that the outfit that the princess invented has become fashionable. Everyone wanted to have the same white feathers sprinkled with diamonds. And in order to take possession of the crests, people began to exterminate white herons. And they destroyed them all. The last two birds came to Isolde. This was the price of the outfit invented by the princess.

When the king found out about what had happened, he was outraged and depressed. Isolde repented and vowed never to harm anyone.

• It is not enough not to do evil - you need to do good. There is already too much suffering in the world, and by causing evil to even the most insignificant creature, you increase this evil,” the father told Isolde. And he added a mysterious phrase:
• But that is not the purpose of man.

  What were the consequences of Isolde’s decision? How do you evaluate her actions? What important things did you learn from Isolde’s conversation with her father? Why not doing evil is not enough? What should you do?

Let's draw a verbal portrait of an irresponsible person. You can recognize him by his behavior. He is selfish and rarely shows concern for others, and is generally indifferent to the fate of nature. For him, nature exists only to take something from it. Maybe he is not a mean or evil person, but he is frivolous and does not think about the consequences of his actions. And he is not rich in intelligence and hardly understands that the true purpose of a person is to do something good and useful. These are the traits of irresponsibility. And you yourself understand what it can lead to.

Environmental morality

People have long had different attitudes towards nature. There are supporters of domination over it. They believe that man is the king and ruler of nature and can dispose of its riches as he pleases. They also like to repeat that nature is hostile and indifferent to people. In order for it to serve a person, it must be constantly conquered and forced to work for oneself. But moral rules exist only for people and do not apply to nature.

This is what the Aral Sea looked like before

This is what the Aral Sea has become now

But there are other people who support cooperation with nature. They consider humans to be part of nature and absolutely do not agree that nature is hostile and indifferent to people. Everything is just the opposite: nature generously and unselfishly gives people everything it has. You just need to work hard to understand its laws as deeply as possible and not break them, otherwise nature may punish you. Proponents of cooperation believe that moral rules should extend to man's relationship with nature.

Let's take the golden rule of morality: treat people the way you want them to treat you. Supporters of cooperation with nature argue that in our time, when serious environmental problems have arisen caused by unreasonable human economic activities, we need to learn to relate to nature in a new way. Therefore, the golden rule of morality should be supplemented and include attitude towards nature. Then it turns out that not only people, but also nature need to be treated the way you want it to treat you.

Do you want it not to happen? environmental problems, learn to treat nature like a human being, responsibly. If you don't learn, you will be in terrible trouble. This new attitude towards nature began to be called environmental morality.

The essence of environmental morality: learn to act in such a way as not to harm nature, not to cause harm to it.

Three main rules of environmental morality:

1. I am personally responsible for preserving nature.
2. I will not harm any living thing - a flower, a tree, a bird, an animal. And of course, to the person.
3. I will help any life I can help - a flower, a tree, a bird, an animal. And of course, to the person.

Let's check ourselves

1. What is the attitude of people towards nature? Describe the most important traits of a responsible person. Why do we call a responsible attitude towards nature truly human?
2. By what behavioral traits can you recognize an irresponsible person? What are the dangers of irresponsibility?
3. What attitude towards nature do you personally choose? Explain why.
4. What would the golden rule of morality sound like if it were supplemented with an attitude towards nature?
5. What is the meaning of environmental morality?

In the classroom and at home

1. Express your opinion: what needs to be done to establish the right relationship between man and nature? Choose the answer that you think is correct:
   1. you don’t need to do anything, the riches of nature will last for many centuries;
   2. every person should be environmentally literate;
   3. Everyone should not only know the rules of attitude towards nature, but also abide by them.
2. Evaluate the statements: “To protect nature means to protect people,” “A person lived his life in vain if he did not plant a tree, did not build a house, did not raise a child,” “If he picked one flower, he lost ten.”
3. Look carefully at how the trees and flowers live in your garden, on your street. Maybe you need to dig up the ground? Dig it up. Maybe you need to put up tree supports or a fence? Try to do this yourself or with one of your comrades.
4. Help homeless animals. They also have the right to life.
5. Find out if there is a Green Patrol at your school. Get to know its participants and offer them your help.
6. Find materials on the Internet about fires in Russia in the summer of 2010. Prepare short message. First of all, indicate the causes of fires, describe the role human factor. Pay special attention to the behavior of children. Make your suggestions: what needs to be done to increase human environmental responsibility.

Publisher: Enlightenment 2015.

Type: Textbook

At the age of fourteen, a student receives a passport, which means that he becomes an adult, able-bodied resident of his state. Consequently, at this age the student can independently sign various contracts. But before you take any action, you still need to know your powers and responsibilities well. During this period, a person already bears full responsibility for his actions, so it is very important to comply with the laws, know and respect them, and be able to protect one’s rights. Bogolyubov's textbook "Social studies for 7th grade" will provide the main topics; after studying them, the student will become a full-fledged and sought-after citizen of his society. He will have to make rational decisions, learn the secrets of professional success, have the ability to predict the prosperity of his business, only then can he create his own business. The child will understand that to preserve and protect nature means to save his life. This is exactly what will be discussed in the lessons of this direction in the seventh year of study.

When faced with difficulties while doing homework, a student can use GDZ in social studies author Bogolyubov L.N. 7th grade. Ready answers, which are in the collection, will allow the seventh grader to understand all the intricacies of self-organization and legal consciousness, manage his mood, and teach him to perceive the behavior of other people around him accordingly. By using online solver Parents will be able to help their child understand more complex tasks without wasting time searching for information.