Events

Environmental Stewardship and Religion – POSTPONED

18 Apr 2013

April 18, 6:30-8:30pm; buffet opens at 6:15pm.

Rose Library, 3rd Floor Flex Space

In recent years, conservative Protestant Christians have been the American group that is the most likely to be against environmental protection efforts.  Demographics do not seem to account for this; rather, the opposition appears to stem from religious positions.

When viewed from a broader, comparative religions perspective, it quickly becomes clear that the very concept of ‘nature’ is culturally constructed, and that American Christianity draws on particular interpretations of the biblical depiction of ‘nature.’  Although the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament promotes a clear and consistent ethic of environmental stewardship, some denominations of Christianity interpret the passages differently, stressing humankind’s dominion over the earth.  When combined with apocalyptic theologies that envision an imminent new world that is fast approaching, there may be little interest in, or even strident opposition to, efforts to address problems such as global warming, species decimation, or air or water quality.  However, the influence of apocalyptic theology does not necessarily determine this outcome; within American evangelical Christianity itself, apocalyptic millennarian hopes have sometimes fused with theology that extols and wishes to protect ‘nature.’ Public policy discussions and efforts about environmental issues have at times alienated and at other times invited action from evangelical leaders.

Speakers:

Frances Flannery, Associate Professor, Dept. of Philosophy and Religion

Brian Kaylor, Assistant Professor, School of Communication Studies

Speaker Bios:

Frances Flannery, Associate Professor, Dept. of Philosophy and Religion, has been at JMU since 2007.  She has authored and edited numerous books and articles on ancient and contemporary apocalypticism, including religious terrorism, and is beginning to revisit her undergraduate training and first career in Environmental Science in conjunction with religious studies.

Brian Kaylor, Assistant Professor, School of Communication Studies, has been at JMU since 2008. His main research areas are religion and politics, including environmental advocacy. He is the author of two books and more than two dozen journal articles.

Sources:

Catherine Albanese, Nature Religion in America, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1990.

Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim, “Overview of World Religions and Ecology,” The Forum on Religion and Ecology 2009. http://fore.research.yale.edu/religion/index.html. 13 January 2013.

United Nations Environment Programme, “An Examination of the Views of Religious Organizations Regarding Global Warming,” The Forum on Religion and Ecology, 7 June, 2007. Web.   http://fore.research.yale.edu/publications/massmedia.  13 January 2013.

Oppositional evangelical statements on the environment: the National Association of Evangelicals (http://www.nae.net/lovingtheleastofthese) & the Cornwall Alliance (http://www.cornwallalliance.org/articles/read/the-cornwall-declaration-on-environmental-stewardship)

By: Category: Events

Consuming Stuff to Produce the Self

21 Mar 2013

March 21, 6:30-8:30pm; buffet opens at 6:15pm.

Rose Library, 3rd Floor Flex Space

A lively discussion regarding the origins of consumer culture (food and goods) as symbolic of social status and self identity as well as contemporary implications for health and well-being.

Speakers:

Meg Mulrooney Associate Dean, University Studies and Associate Professor of History

Stephanie Baller, Assistant Professor of Health Sciences

Speaker Bios:

Stephanie Baller joined JMU in the Fall of 2010. Her research interests include the impacts of consumer culture and materialism on health and physical activity.

Meg Mulrooney became interested in Americans’ fascination with goods during grad school, when she specialized in material culture and 19th century social history. Immigrant consumption patterns were central to her first book, Black Powder, White Lace: The du Pont Irish and Cultural Identity in 19thC America (2001). She continues to explore consumerism in her American Studies classes and in her current research project, a study of race relations in Wilmington, NC.

Readings:

The Marketplace of Revolution: How Consumer Politics Shaped American Independence by T. H. Breen

Review by: Jane T. Merritt
The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography , Vol. 129, No. 2 (Apr., 2005), pp. 231-232
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20093788
The Consumer Revolution: Now, Only Yesterday, Or a Long Time Ago?

Of Consuming Interests: The Style of Life in the Eighteenth Century by Cary Carson; Ronald Hoffman; Peter J. Albert
Review by: Paul G. E. Clemens
Reviews in American History , Vol. 23, No. 4 (Dec., 1995), pp. 574-581
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2702976
Being Seen at All the Best Restaurants: Food and Body in Consumer Culture

Clare Wyllie
Agenda , No. 51, Food: Needs, Wants and Desires (2002), pp. 63-69
Published by: Agenda Feminist Media
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4548039
Consumer Culture Theory (CCT): Twenty Years of Research

Eric J. Arnould and Craig J. Thompson
Journal of Consumer Research , Vol. 31, No. 4 (March 2005), pp. 868-882
Article DOI: 10.1086/426626
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/426626
By: Category: Events

Honey, we have 2 billion more for dinner: Agriculture, hunger, and global justice

15 Nov 2012

November 15, 6:30-8:30pm; buffet opens at 6:15pm.
Rose Library, 3rd Floor Flex Space

See below for a recording of the event: Presenters begin just after the 4 minute mark, small group discussion at the 39 minute mark.

 

Registration is closed.

“Global human population is projected to increase from 7 billion today to more than 9 billion by 2050. To sufficiently feed these people, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN projects that food availability will need to increase by at least 70 percent.” (http://www.worldresourcesreport.org/)

Agricultural ecosystems have become incredibly good at producing food, but these increased yields have environmental costs that cannot be ignored. Agriculture already uses 38% of all land area, 85% of all water consumption, and over one fourth of the Earth’s total primary productivity each year. “The global environmental impact of agriculture on natural ecosystems may be as serious a problem as global climate change.” (Tilman, 1999, PNAS 96:5995). Can the planet feed 9 billion people without ravaging the remaining natural ecosystems? Should it?

Speakers:
Carole Nash, Assistant Professor, Department of Integrated Science and Technology
Mary Handley, Associate Professor, Department of Integrated Science and Technology

Speaker Bios:
Carole Nash, Assistant Professor, Department of Integrated Science and Technology, has taught at JMU for 23 years. She has over 30 years of experience in the archaeology of the Middle Atlantic region and is a specialist in the archaeology of the Appalachians. Her main interests are long-term environmental adaptations of small-scale societies that transitioned from hunting and gathering to a settled, agricultural way of life.

Mary Handley, Associate Professor, Department of Integrated Science and Technology, has been at JMU for 14 years. She has experience in horticulture, plant pathology, plant breeding, and sustainable agriculture and has lived, gardened, and taught in the Northeast, Southeast, Mid-Atlantic, Great Plains and California’s Central Valley.

Sources:
National Geographic’s 2011 Year-Long series on ‘The 7 Billion’:  http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/7-billion

United Nations’ World Food Programme Must Reads:  http://www.wfp.org/stories/feeding-7-billion-people-7-must-reads

D. Tilman, 1999, Global environmental impacts of agricultural expansion: The need for sustainable and efficient practices, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 96: 5995-6000.

PlJ. Ericksen, Ingram, S.I., and D.M. Liverman, 2009, Food security and global environmental change: emerging challenges, Environmental Science and Policy 12: 373-377.

By: Category: Events, Two billion more for dinner

The Sustainable Muse: a poetry reading and discussion

8 Nov 2012

Time: Nov 8th, 7pm to 8:30pm

Location: Carrier Library

Join us as we host Susan Facknitz of the English Department and her class for an evening of poetry and discussion on sustainability. Beverages and treats will be provided. No registration necessary.

By: Category: Events

Dividing Up the Pollution Pie in the Chesapeake Bay: Who’s Left With the Crumbs?

10 Oct 2012

October 10, 6:30-8:30pm
Rose Library, 3rd Floor Flex Space

See below for a recording of the event: Presenters begin at 10 minute mark, small group discussion at 40 minute mark.

 

TMDL/Watershed Field Coordinator Nesha McRae of the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation will join JMU Political Science and Public Administration Professor Rob Alexander to discuss the complexities of improving water quality on a regional scale while maintaining a localized farm-based economy. How is the burden of restoring our polluted waterways distributed among watershed stakeholders and is this approach fairly balancing environmental quality and economic growth? If not, what are the costs of failing to do so?

A light buffet will be provided.

Nesha McRae, TMDL/Watershed Field Coordinator, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
Rob Alexander, Assistant Professor of Political Science and Public Administration, James Madison University

By: Category: Events, Pollution Pie in the Chesapeake Bay

The Locavore’s Dilemma: Food, Agriculture, and Global Sustainability

15 Mar 2012

Please Note: Registration for March 15 is closed, because event space is at capacity.

The JMuse Cafe on The Locavore’s Dilemma: Food, Agriculture, and Global Sustainability will be held on Thursday, March 15 in the Flex Space on the Third Floor of the East Campus Library. The event space will open at 6:45 PM, and a light buffet will be available. The program will begin at 7:00 PM with guest speakers (1) Maria Papadakis (Professor of Integrated Science and Technology and Geographic Science) and (2) John A. Scherpereel (Associate Professor of Political Science and Director of Florence Programs). Here are the titles and abstracts for their ten-minute presentations:

(1) The Real Cost of Food–Agricultural Sustainability and Why It Matters

Locavore, omnivore, monoculture, vegan, slow food, permaculture,
artisanal food–what do all of these have to do with sustainability?
Our introduction to the evening’s topic explains the environmental,
social, and ethical dimensions of agricultural sustainability, and how
they connect to the many ways we currently think about food lifestyles
and agricultural production.

(2) Fast Food Nation vs. Under the Tuscan Sun–Myths and Realities of Food on Two Continents

The United States is the land of fast food, dietary fads, Super
Wal-Mart, subsidized monoculture, and solitary meals. Europe is the
land of Slow Food, culinary tradition, neighborhood markets, organic
farms, and multi-generational feasts. Are these stereotypes really
accurate? The evening’s second presentation explores whether Europe
and America are converging and investigates the extent to which
American and European approaches to food and agriculture are
sustainable.

 

 

By: Category: Events, The Locavore's Dilemma

Cupid’s Arrows: Can Science Predict Trajectory?

9 Feb 2012

When: Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 6:30 – 8:30 PM

PARKING: Attendees from the local community may park in the Warsaw Street Parking Deck for the February 9 JMuse anytime after 6:15 PM. (To verify the location of this parking deck, see the appropriate portion of the Campus Map on the JMU website.) Once you have parked in the deck, take the stairs to the groundlevel of the deck, walk along the breezeway toward Main Street, and then take the doord on your right into the Forbes Center. You can find the Harris Studio Theatre Lobby (which is at the south end of the Forbes Center) by following the trail of flower petals.

Where: Harris Studio Theatre Lobby, Forbes Center
The February 9 event is the first one to be held “beyond the Libraries.” The JMuse Café organizers are grateful to Regan Byrne, Executive Director of the Forbes Center, for making this space available to us.

The topic “Cupid’s Arrows: Can Science Predict Trajectory?” has been selected in recognition of Valentine’s Day. Three guest speakers will “set the table” for conversations: Beth Eck, Associate Professor of Sociology, Anne Stewart, Professor of Graduate Psychology, and Robin McNallie, Associate Professor Emeritus of English. Beth and Anne will raise ideas and questions – some of them surprising and provocative — about romantic love. Robin will read a few short pieces selected from the enormous literature on love.

We are also grateful to several JMU students who have volunteered to share their musical talents at the event: flutists Sarah Casey and Kathryn Whitesel, and vocalists Rachel Sandler and Leslie Zaipain.

As usual at a JMuse Café event, once the speakers have made their presentations, we’ll allow a few minutes for comments and questions as a single large group, and then we’ll devote about 45 minutes to discussions around the various tables. After that we’ll reconvene to hear comments from the tables and we’ll conclude with informal conversation, sweets, and more music.

Abstract for Beth Eck’s Remarks

The institutionalization of the “romantic love complex” (Goode 1959) in the West teaches us that falling in love is highly desirable and that any lifelong union without it is destined for disaster. Despite beliefs that there is “one person for everyone” and that love is “fated,” careful attention to the matter reveals that societies play a large role in structuring love – what it means and with whom we should experience it. As much as we believe in “destiny,” most spend considerable effort attracting “the one” they desire. My remarks on February 9 will provide a launch pad for conversations regarding how societies control love, and how the messages from social actors and agencies frame what romantic love means.

PDF: Beth Eck’s Remarks – Can Science Predict Trajectory?

 

Abstract for Anne Stewart’s Remarks

Cupid’s arrows were believed to prompt romantic love for the person, or god, who was pierced. In this JMuse, we will examine recent discoveries from neuroscience and interpersonal theories about people in love–exploring what the Greeks named the “madness of the gods.” We will have an opportunity to learn about the “neural liquor” fueling our passion and to discuss diverse aspects of love, including passion, commitment and intimacy. We’ll investigate the energy and craving of romantic passion, the science of attraction and how love evolves over time. Just in time for Valentine’s Day, we hope you can come and engage in lively conversations, from and about the heart.

PDF: Anne Stewart’s Presentation – The Science of Romantic Love

By: Category: Cupid's Arrows, Events

Funding the Arts and Sciences: Why? How? How much?

Funding the Arts and Sciences: Why? How? How much?

10 Nov 2011

Artists and scientific researchers working in the United States are arguably the most productive in the world. Who supports their creative endeavors, and why? What are the various funding mechanisms? How much do taxpayers expend for the arts and sciences through the federal, state, and municipal governments? What are the arguments for and against public funding for these activities?

Join us at the JMuse Café on Thursday evening, November 10, when we’ll explore these and other questions.  Our guest speakers will be Dr. Anca Constantin of the JMU Department of Physics and Astronomy and Dr. Dennis Beck of the JMU School of Theatre and Dance.

Each JMuse Café event is held from 7:00 until 8:30 PM in the third-floor Flex Space of the East Campus Library. Events are free and open to the public, and light refreshments are provided.  Because seating is limited, advance online registration is required at http://sites.jmu.edu/jmuse/reservations/. You can reserve your space beginning one week prior to the event; registration closes at noon on the day of the event.

 

Background Briefing

Let’s take a moment to paint the landscape in broad brush strokes without taking any time here to define “the arts” and “the sciences.” The arts and the sciences in this country have very different histories which are reflected both in our language and in the Federal Budget.  The two-word descriptor “starving artist” is familiar to most of us, but the descriptor “starving scientist” may have just now had its first use.

Why? The National Science Foundation was established in 1950 with the mission “To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense.” The National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities (the forerunner to the NEA and the NEH) was established in 1965. The NEA is “dedicated to supporting excellence in the arts, both new and established; bringing the arts to all Americans; and providing leadership in arts education”. The NEH mission is “promoting excellence in the humanities and conveying the lessons of history to all Americans.”

How Much? Here are some numbers from the 2010 Federal Budget, which totaled $3,552 billion (just under $11,500 per capita)

NSF received $6.9 billion, about $22 per capita

NEH received $171 million, about 55 cents per capita

NEA received $161 million, about 52 cents per capita

→  NSF received about 20 times as much direct Federal funding as NEH and NEA combined. The total for all three agencies is about 2 thousandths of the budget.

How? Taken by themselves, these widely disparate numbers oversimplify the situation. There are federal agencies other than NSF (such as the NASA and the National Institutes of Health) which have even larger budgets and which also fund much scientific research. On the other hand, the direct Federal funding of the arts is a small fraction of support for the arts: there are scores of charitable foundations, such as the Carnegie Corporation and the Mellon Foundation, which collectively provide much more arts funding than the federal government directly.  (The government subsidizes these indirectly because donors to these organizations receive tax deductions for their donations.)

 

Guest Speakers’ Abstract

 Anca Constantin and Dennis Beck consider arguments for and against public funding of the arts.  How will activities which have historically advanced supported by patronage of various kinds to continue to develop in systems in which commercial viability or immediate results receive priority?  Who should fund such activities?  Should they be supported at least in part through public means?  In a period of economic contraction, where in the list of economic priorities should the arts and the sciences fall?  What, ultimately, is the value of the sciences and of the arts? Constantin and Beck consider, debate, and discuss the similarities and differences between the arts and sciences regarding issues of funding, cultural perception, instrumental and intrinsic value, and the role of universities like JMU in the ongoing struggles to find the sources from which to fund projects that artists and scientists view as worthy but that sections of the public and politicians may not.

By: Category: Events, Funding the Arts, Past Events

After Fukushima, What about Nuclear Power?

After Fukushima, What about Nuclear Power?

19 Oct 2011

104 nuclear power plants provide about 20 percent of the electric power for the United States. Only coal and natural gas provide larger shares. Nuclear electric power has been controversial since its introduction more than half a century ago. Public concern and scrutiny has grown since March 2011, when an earthquake and tsunami crippled several reactors at the Fukushima Dai-ichi site on Japan’s east coast.

Most of the points of contention around the use of nuclear power can be grouped under one of several headings:

  • Economics
  • Energy Independence and Climate Change
  • The Fuel Cycle, Reprocessing, and Waste
  • Diversion, Terrorism, and Weapons Proliferation
  • Environmental Impacts during Routine Operation
  • Mishaps and Natural Disasters: Vulnerability and Mitigation

When and Where? – The year’s first JMuse Café event is Wednesday evening, October 19 from 7:00 until 8:30 PM in the Flex Space of the East Campus Library. Come and join other members of the campus community for a lively exchange on the issues surrounding nuclear power.  Refreshments will be served.  Because space is limited, reservations are required.

Guest Speakers’ Abstract

Note: Two guest speakers started the October 19 JMuse Cafe program: Dr. Steve Whisnant (JMU Physics and Astronomy) and Dr. Kevin Borg (History). Dr. Borg has provided the following abstract and references.

The point of this brief provocation is to point out the political ramifications of adopting nuclear power.  Drawing on arguments made by Lewis Mumford and Langdon Winner, we must acknowledge that nuclear power is an inherently political technology.  That is, to embrace nuclear power (or weapons), is to also embrace strong and centralized political power, both in order to make it “work” and to ensure our own safety.  This runs counter to the current political climate in the U.S. of anti-government rhetoric and budget cutting, so I ask if this is where Americans, and the world, are ready to go—and to remain far into the future.  Also, combining Ulrich Beck’s notion of a “risk society” with Charles Perrow’s theory of “normal accidents” in highly complex systems, we must consider that nuclear power (like the excessive burning of fossil fuels) introduces a historically new scale of risk in human affairs, one that perhaps transcends our current, regionally-based political institutions’ ability to adequately address or resolve.  I urge those present to consider more than the economics or technical feasibility of nuclear power.  Merely technical or economic viability matters little if you have inadequate or unstable political structures or if you desire to have decentralized political power.  Nuclear power technology is inherently inflexible in terms of the political environment within which it will work safely.  And, if human history shows us anything, it is that political structures are not fixed and stable.  The end of history has not arrived.  In the 1970s the US allowed the sale of a nuclear power reactor to the Shah of Iran.  Look at Iran now.

Here are a few of sources on the broader consideration of political structures, nuclear power, and risk:

Langdon Winner, “Do Artifacts have Politics?” Daedalus v. 109 (Winter 1980)

Langdon Winner, The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in the Age of High Technology (University of Chicago Press, 1989)

Ulrich Beck, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (Sage, 1992)

Charles Perrow, Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies (Princeton, 1999)

Lewis Mumford, “Authoritarian and Democratic Technics,” Technology and Culture v. 5 (Winter 1964).

On the centrality of WWII, the Manhattan Project, and the ensuing Cold War to the economic and political environment that fostered nuclear power generation—that transformed nuclear technology into what we think of today, rather than the glow-in-the-dark watch dials and x-rays we saw before the war—see:

M. Joshua Silverman, “Nuclear Technology” in Carroll Pursell, ed., A Companion to American Technology (Blackwell 2005).

Carroll Pursell, Technology in Postwar America (Columbia University Press, 2007)

Thomas Hughes, American Genesis: A Century of Technological Enthusiasm, 1870-1970 (Penguin, 1989). See especially chapter 8.

By: Category: After Fukushima, Events, Past Events Tags: