Analysis of Michael Pollan’s essay Why Bother?”
Michael Pollan, in his essay Why Bother,” published on April 20, 2008, in the New York Times, is convincing the public to do their own individual share of averting climate change by bothering to do what they may think are insignificant activities, yet nevertheless would help decrease the release of CO2 into the atmosphere. In his essay, he tackles the dilemma of how difficult that task is, considering that the heart of the problem is a crisis of character – a fault in modern man’s ingrained way of thinking and doing things. Pollan asserts in his essay that the difficulty to avert climate change is not because it requires massive human acts and sacrifices, but because it demands a collective, insignificant individual change in daily human activities – a change, however, that is not seen as an obvious solution to the problem by most people.
The above assertion points out three claims made by Pollan in the essay. First, the task of contributing an individual share to avert climate change is so ordinary, simple, and utterly useless that it may be regarded as a bother. Second, man’s countless everyday acts and choices are what have put him into the crisis of climate change, and radically changing his everyday acts and choices may well save the planet. Third, modern man does not realize that a personal change is demanded of him to solve the problem of climate change.
For the first claim, Pollan derives his evidence from quotations, feedback from scientists, and reasoning. He quotes former Vice-President Al Gore’s documentary movie, An Inconvenient Truth,” where in the closing credits it asks the viewers to change their light bulbs (Pollan 1). Even though the problem of climate change or global warming seems daunting, Al Gore’s documentary proposes that merely changing a light bulb may help solve the problem. What a very simple and ordinary solution to a big problem! But, in Pollan’s reasoning, the ordinariness and simplicity itself are actually what have made it more difficult to undertake since the task looks insignificant and useless. Instead of being seen as a solution, it is regarded more as a bother, an unchallenging interruption to everyday ways of living (Pollan 2). Moreover, this little seemingly insignificant task looks more insignificant considering the fact that something radically big needs to be done as soon as possible to save the planet; otherwise, it will be too late to save it. Pollan supports this fear by drawing evidence from scientist projections who declare that the warming and the melting are occurring much faster than the models they had predicted, stating that “climate change is upon us and it has arrived well ahead of its schedule” (Pollan 1).
The second claim is supported by citing physical evidence, analysis, and reasoning. It is not as though something awfully huge made by some particular individuals has caused this crisis, but that it has accumulated through the years as each individual collectively encouraged the production of CO2 through their daily lifestyle. Pollan points out several examples of man’s daily ordinary activities such as driving, using light, and eating—activities that, upon careful analysis, directly and indirectly cause the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere (Pollan 1-2). According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, transport accounts for between 55% and 99% of greenhouse gases…two-thirds of it is attributable to the private car in the form of CO2″ (OECD 17). Pollan reasons that as long as man rides a car or patronizes these products, he is actually encouraging the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. If all of these daily individual activities are summed up together, by mathematical reasoning, the consequence is magnified.
Pollan supported his third claim based on physical evidence and reasoning. He points out that modern man is used to solving his big problems by implementing legislation or technology, or by looking for leaders and experts, rather than by actually thinking that he needs to change his lifestyle. As evidence, he cites modern man’s reliance and dependence on specialists such as agribusiness for meals, doctors for health, teachers for education, and environmentalists for the care of the environment (Pollan 2). As a generalization from these examples, Pollan concludes that it is unimaginable for modern man to think that he really has the personal responsibility to prevent climate change by making changes in his everyday life. Logically, based on the preceding examples, man would naturally think that it is the government, scientists, or environmentalists who take care of the problem of climate change and not himself. Personally, this is what I had thought before, that the big responsibility does not rest on me but on others who have the “official” responsibility.
What is being warranted in Pollan’s assertion is that all of humanity causes the problem and should therefore work together as a whole to solve it. Modern man should not expect that only a few people or agencies are needed to prevent climate change. As long as the source of the problem is not removed, the problem will always persist.
In this essay, Pollan makes use of the three types of appeals (pathos, ethos, and logos) to convince his listeners to take his side and really care. He uses the ethos appeal to derive credibility for his arguments by quoting or citing statements from reliable sources and individuals who have the authority to speak about the issue, such as then Vice President Al Gore’s documentary movie “The Inconvenient Truth” and scientists. In the logos appeal, he engages his audience in an intellectual discussion, using a lot of mathematical or logical reasoning and generalizations to make his point and arrive at conclusions. He also makes use of the pathos appeal; at one point, he stirs up fear in the audience when he describes the terrifying threats of the exponential increase of CO2 concentration in the Arctic and then proceeds to ask, “Have you looked into the eyes of a climate scientist recently? They look really scared” (Pollan 1). At the same time, he motivates his audience to take action by reminding them how beautiful, rewarding, and accomplished they would feel if they do care (like caring to plant a garden) (Pollan 4).
In the essay Why Bother,” Michael Pollan is trying to make each person see their responsibility in preventing climate change and that what an individual can do may look insignificant but collectively can make a huge difference. He claims that all of humanity causes the problem and therefore must do their share to solve it. In convincing his audience to believe his arguments, Pollan uses evidence to support his claims by quoting reliable sources and using physical evidence and observation. To convince his audience, he uses a lot of reasoning based on the evidence and uses language that would motivate and stir up his audience to action.
Works cited.
OECD. Strategies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Road Transport: Analytical Methods. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Publishing, 2002.
Pollan, Michael. Why Bother?” The New York Times Online. 20 April 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/magazine/20wwln-lede-t.html.
