Lesson video

Hello, my name's Mrs. Rawbone and I'm your RE teacher today.

I'd like to welcome you to this lesson on the use and abuse of the environment, which is part of a unit on religion and life.

In today's lesson, you will be able to explain how human activity affects the environment and how both religious and non-religious perspectives influence sustainability efforts.

The keywords that we'll be using in today's lesson are commodity, environment, pollution, resources, as in natural, and stewardship.

A commodity is something that can be used for personal gain.

The environment is the world around us.

This can be made up of natural or artificial surroundings.

Pollution is contamination of an environment with harmful substances.

Resources, as in natural resources, are resources which are found in nature, fossil fuels, for example, coal, oil, natural gas, plants, et cetera.

And stewardship is the duty given by God to humankind to look after the created world and all life within it.

Today's lesson on the use and abuse of the environment will take two parts.

We will be looking at the Earth as a commodity and we'll be looking at global citizenship and sustainability.

So let's start looking at the Earth as a commodity.

Jacob and Sofia's teacher has asked them to discuss what people mean when they say the Earth is a commodity.

Sofia says, "What does it mean to use the Earth as a commodity?" Jacob replies, "It means using the Earth and its resources up." Sofia's response is, "So that includes cutting down forests for wood or land without thinking about how they help the environment?" Jacob replies, "Yes, and pollution is another example.

Factories and cars dump harmful chemicals into the air, water, and land." And Sofia concludes some resources like oil and water are being used up faster than they can be replaced as if they'll never run out.

Pollution.

What is happening? Well, harmful substances are released into the environment.

These include chemicals, waste, or noise.

Why is it a problem? Well, it's a problem because it harms human health.

It disrupts ecosystems and it contributes to climate change.

Use of natural resources.

What is happening? Non-renewable resources like water, fossil fuels, and forests are being used faster than they can be replaced.

Why is it a problem? Well, it's a problem because it harms biodiversity, it depletes resources, it creates unfairness between countries and it contributes to climate change.

Let's check your understanding.

Give two examples of how the Earth is treated as a commodity.

Take your time, have a think about the answer, pause if you need to, and then come back and check what you could have written.

So the examples that I have given are pollution and overuse of natural resources.

You might have been more specific and said something like deforestation.

Well done if you managed to give two examples.

Let's think about ethical questions surrounding the use of the Earth.

Is it right to treat the Earth and its resources as a commodity? Is it fair to ask people to sacrifice their living standards and stop treating the Earth as a commodity? Is it fair for rich countries to use more of the Earth resources while poor countries have less? Is it fair to see the Earth as a commodity without thinking about future generations? Sofia and Laura are discussing how we should treat the Earth.

So Sofia says, "We all share this planet and our actions affect people everywhere.

Treating the Earth like it's only there for us ignores the impact on others and on the future." Laura says, "If we keep using resources without thinking, they'll run out and there won't be enough for the future.

Protecting the Earth matters more than just taking from it." So when Sofia says, "We all share this planet and our actions affect people everywhere," she's talking about global citizenship, which means seeing yourself as part of a worldwide community, taking responsibility for how your actions affect other people and the itself.

So let's check your understanding.

What is global citizenship? Take a moment to think about how best to define this.

Pause the video and come back when you are ready to check.

Well done if you put something like this.

Global citizenship is the understanding that our actions affect everyone and it's the responsibility to care for the planet for future generations.

Laura said, "If we keep using resources without thinking, they'll run out and there won't be enough for the future." What Laura's talking about here is sustainability, which means using resources wisely so future generations can meet their needs.

And this is part of global citizenship, taking responsibility for the planet to benefit everyone.

So let's check your understanding on sustainability.

Which of the following is an example of sustainability? Is it A, using fossil fuels for energy without considering future impact? Is it B, planting trees to replace those that were cut down? Is it C, overfishing oceans to meet current demand or is it D, wasting food by throwing large amounts away? Take a moment to think about your answer.

Pause the video if you need to and then come back when you're ready to check.

So well done if you put B, planting trees to replace those that were cut down.

There are arguments both in support of the statement, the Earth is a commodity, and arguments to support a different point of view.

So if we're thinking about support or arguments for, the idea that the Earth is a resource which we can use for our benefit.

This would mean that we could use resources because they drive business, they boost economies.

And another point in favour is access to resources can enhance people's living standards.

On the other hand, a different view.

One which goes against the statement would be that the Earth is a shared home which should be protected.

So on this thinking, you could argue that overuse leads to pollution and then to climate change, and it can lead to inequality as richer countries exploit more of the Earth's resources.

So if your practise task, I'd like you to complete the table and set out the positives and negatives of treating the Earth as a commodity.

So using the table, thinking about the Earth as a resource which we can all use for our benefit, what would be the positives and what would be the negatives of this? Some keywords that you could use would be climate change, economies, exploit, inequality, living standards, pollution, and use of natural resources.

So pause the video, take your time working out what the positives and negatives of treating the Earth as something that is for our benefit would be.

Once you've finished, come back to see what you might have written.

So let's have a look at what you could have said.

On the positives, you might have said, it leads to business growth and it boosts economies.

It improves living standards by providing access to goods and services or even it encourages new ideas and technology.

On the negatives, you might have said, it leads to pollution and environmental damage.

The overuse of natural resources can lead to climate change and that exploiting resources harms poorer countries and leads to inequality.

So well done, particularly if you manage to use some of those key terms. And you talked about on the one hand, improving living standards, but on the other hand, having that negative of climate change.

So let's think about practising our understanding more.

So I'd like you to decide whether the positives or the negatives matter most when you're thinking about whether to treat the Earth as a commodity.

So this is some practise in the skill of evaluation and it's a really good idea not to just say some people think this and other people think that, but to actually put a little bit of weight into what you're saying.

So in other words, you're going to choose a point that you think is strong from the table that you put together earlier.

It could be a positive or a negative.

So it needs to be something that you think, "Yes, this is a point that I would make in a discussion." So you might want to support the statement and see the Earth as a commodity or you might want to use it to support a different of view.

What you're going to do then once you've chosen what you think is the strongest point is you're going to explain why this is strong.

And this is the bit that's a really useful skill to use when you are working on evaluation questions.

Putting in not just what the point is, not just how it works, but also what the value of that point is, how convincing it is.

So here are some sentence starters that you could use to help you with part B of that task.

You could use one argument is, and then go on to say, this argument is strong because, or this is compelling because, or the argument is powerful as it, or perhaps this argument is convincing because.

So take your time, have a think about what you think is a really good point on either side of that debate, on the positives or the negatives.

And when you've done that, I want you to think carefully about why you think that's a strong point.

And then you're going to write it up and you can use if you choose to these sentence starters.

So pause the video, give yourself time to complete that task and come back when you're ready to see the kind of thing that you might have written.

So let's have a look at what you could have said.

So here's an example that I chose.

I said, "An argument against treating the Earth as a commodity is that exploiting resources harms poorer countries and leads to inequality." And I chose that because for me, it's the most convincing reason not to treat the Earth as something that's just for our benefit.

And then you could have said, "This argument is convincing because it shows how richer countries often take more resources leaving poorer countries vulnerable and disadvantaged." So I've explained a bit more detail about the argument, but I've also shown that I think it's a strong or convincing argument.

So your answer might be quite different from mine 'cause it depends which point you picked, but just have a look and check that you have got an explanation of why you think it's a convincing argument.

Well done if you've got anything similar to this.

So let's move on to the second part of our lesson, global citizenship and sustainability.

Tia attends a Methodist Church.

She has been asked about her views on global citizenship and sustainability.

Tia says, "Global citizenship and stewardship go hand in hand as the teaching fill the Earth and subdue it" shows that we have a duty to protect the Earth.

"I reduce, reuse, and recycle as much as possible, and I also support eco-friendly companies.

My church is working with the Christian charity, A Rocha, and as an eco church, we are cutting our energy use and supporting biodiversity.

I believe treating the Earth as a commodity goes against our role as stewards." So take some time to have a think or discussion if you can, if there's someone nearby or you can pause and talk to me.

Why doesn't Tia treat the Earth as a commodity? Well, the reason is that she believes it goes against stewardship.

So let's check your understanding.

What is A Rocha? Is it A, a Christian charity focused on protecting biodiversity and the environment? Is it B, a political movement aimed at reducing pollution in urban areas? Is it C, a business that promotes eco-friendly products and services? Or is it D, a government organisation dedicated to managing national parks? To pause the video whilst you have a think and jot down your answer and then come back when you're ready to check.

So well done if you put A, A Rocha is a Christian charity and it focuses on protecting biodiversity and the environment.

And some of its work is actually with encouraging churches to become more eco-friendly, known as eco church.

Danielle is a Roman Catholic.

She has been asked about her views on global citizenship and sustainability.

She says, "Creation reflects God's goodness and we are its stewards.

As global citizens, we should think about the poor and vulnerable who are most affected by environmental damage.

Caring for the environment is a way of putting Jesus' teaching to love your neighbour and to practise.

I reduce waste, recycle, conserve energy, and support environmental initiatives to protect the Earth.

Doing this is our duty as stewards of creation." Why does Danielle think caring for the Earth means caring for people too? Pause a video, talk to somebody nearby if you can or you can talk to me, and then come back when you are ready to move on.

So you might have said that Danielle explained that caring for the Earth shows love for the poor because they're the ones who are most affected by environmental damage.

Rachel is a Plymouth Brethren.

She has been asked about her views on global citizenship and sustainability.

Rachel says, "I see the Earth as a gift from God, not a commodity to exploit.

We should be mindful of how we use natural resources and avoid polluting the environment as this reflects our respect for God's creation.

In my daily life, I try to live sustainably by tending for my vegetable garden, but my faith comes first.

Any efforts to reduce pollution or consumption are done to honour God, balancing respect for creation with my spiritual growth." So although she does live sustainably, why isn't this Rachel's top priority? Have a talk with somebody nearby if you're able to or talk to me, pause the video and come back when you're ready to move on.

So you might have noticed that Rachel thinks that spiritual matters are more important.

Diane is a humanist.

She has been asked about her views on global citizenship and sustainability.

Diane says, "I believe we must care for the Earth as we are global citizens and treating it as a commodity harms the environment and vulnerable communities.

As a member of Humanist Climate Action, I advocate for policies that reduce pollution, promote renewable energy, and encourage sustainability.

I reduce my carbon footprint, support ethical businesses, and push for change.

Sustainability ensures future generations can thrive." So how does Diane show that she is a global citizen? Take some time to talk to somebody nearby if you can or pause and talk to me and then come back when you're ready to move on.

So Diane tries to live more sustainably and she's also a member of Humanist Climate Action.

So let's check your understanding.

Give one way that someone might reduce their environmental impact.

Take a moment to think about your answer, pause the video if you need to, and then come back when you are ready to check what you might have written.

So you could have said, cycling or walking instead of driving, recycling, supporting eco-friendly companies, reducing waste, and growing your own vegetables.

Well done if you said any of those things.

So for task B, I'd like you to decide whether the arguments support the statement, "Religious people should prioritise reducing pollution," and I'd like you to do that by completing the table using examples and evidence to explain.

So there are four arguments.

We have, number one, Christians are stewards of God's creation.

Number two, secular organisations, that means non-religious organisations, focus on stopping pollution so Christians do not need to.

Number three, those who suffer most from pollution are the vulnerable and Christians should help them.

And number four, God will restore His creation, so we should focus on our spiritual lives, but also live responsibly.

So remember, you're deciding if they provide support or not, and then you're going to explain why you decided that.

So pause the video.

Use this as an opportunity to practise developing arguments when you are evaluating a statement.

Come back when you are ready to see what you might have written.

So let's have a look at what you could have said.

Number one seems to be support for the argument because Genesis 1:28 calls humans to fill the Earth and subdue it, which most Christians see as a call to conserve resources, protect wildlife, and reduce pollution.

Number two seems to go against because it's suggesting that government initiatives and environmental charities can handle issues around pollution, which would leave Christians free to focus on other priorities such as evangelism, which is spreading the good news of Christianity.

Number three provides support for the statement and it's following Jesus' command to love your neighbour.

Pollution harms the poor.

So addressing pollution shows compassion or love to your neighbour.

So number four goes against the statement.

And that's because although most Christians would do what they can to protect the environment, it may not be for some fundamentalist groups their priority.

So Christians such as Plymouth Brethren believe Jesus will return and create a new Earth.

So this means that the Earth will be restored.

So instead they might focus more their priorities on spiritual work.

So well done if you worked out whether the statements were support or whether they were putting across a different point of view.

So in today's lesson on the use and abuse of the environment, we have learned about the overuse of natural resources and environmental harm such as pollution.

And we've seen that this reflects treating the Earth as a commodity.

We've learned that global citizenship involves taking responsibility for the planet and ensuring its sustainability.

We've learned that Christian teachings emphasise stewardship, highlighting the duty to protect and care for God's creation.

We've learned that pollution, resource depletion, and climate change contribute to global inequality and environmental damage.

And we've learned that actions to reduce environmental impacts include reducing waste using renewable energy and supporting eco-friendly companies.

Thank you for all your hard work this lesson and for working with me today.