Lesson video

Hello, my name's Mrs. Neeru Bland and I'd like to welcome you to this RE lesson today on the value of the world and stewardship as part of a unit on religion and life.

In today's lesson, you're going to have to explain views on the value of the world, including Christian and non-religious perspectives on dominion, stewardship, and intrinsic value.

Keywords that we'll be using today are creation, dominion, extrinsic in terms of value, intrinsic again in terms of value and stewardship.

Now creation is the act of bringing everything in the world into existence.

Dominion is the belief that humans have been given control or charge of the world.

Extrinsic value means that something is valuable based on what it provides or how it benefits us.

Intrinsic value means something is valuable just because it exists regardless of its usefulness.

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 value of the world and stewardship will have three parts.

First, we'll be looking at the value of the world.

Secondly, Christian teachings on the value of the world and finally, different views on the value of the world.

So let's get started on the value of the world, Sam and Jun are asking some philosophical questions about the value of the world.

Sam says, "Do we have a responsibility to protect the earth?" Jun asks, "Does the earth belong to humanity to use as it sees fit?" Have a think.

What might help us to answer these questions? Pause the video and turn and talk to somebody nearby if you are able to, or you can pause and talk to me, come back when you are ready to move on.

Here we can see a photograph of the Grand Canyon.

Human beings have the ability to appreciate the beauty and complexity of nature, and this emotional connection can be described as feeling awe and wonder.

Awe is the immediate feeling of the deep respect that we encounter when we see something amazing.

So for example, Izzy says, "Standing at the edge of the Grand Canyon, I felt a sense of awe at its size and complexity.

When we feel awe, this leads us to wonder, which is a thoughtful admiration of something amazing." So Izzy explains that the experience of being at the Grand Canyon filled her with wonder at the power and beauty of nature.

So let's check your understanding.

What are the missing words? Something is the immediate feeling of deep respect.

When we encounter something amazing and it leads to which is thoughtful admiration, pause the video, jot down what you think the two missing words are and come back when you are ready to check.

Well done if you put awe and wonder.

So awe is what comes first is that feeling of deep respect that leads to the thoughtful admiration of wonder.

Most people, whether religious or non-religious, agree that the world has value, although this might be for different reasons.

Extrinsic value comes from the Latin word extrinsecus, which translates as outside.

So this view, the natural world is valuable because it's a commodity that provides resources we rely on to survive.

So in other words, its value is dependent on something outside of itself.

So a forest might be valued for timber or for their role in reducing carbon dioxide and oceans might be important for fishing and transportation.

In contrast, intrinsic value comes from the Latin intrinsecus, which translates as on the inside.

In this case, if you believe the natural world has intrinsic value, you don't see it as a commodity.

It's valuable in itself simply because it exists.

So forest, oceans and landscapes are valued for themselves, not because of what they provide for us or even for how they make us feel.

Many people recognise the world's intrinsic worth, but they also see it as important for their survival, and so value it extrinsically too.

So extrinsic value, the earth is valuable because it benefits us in some way, often overlaps with intrinsic value, the view that the earth has inherent value simply because it exists.

So the overlap here is that whether or not you think the earth has extrinsic or intrinsic value, you do agree that the earth is valuable and you may think both of those things at the same time.

Sam and Lucas are discussing the statement, the earth is humanity's to use as it sees fit.

Sam says, "The earth exists to benefit humans and we have the right to use its resources as commodities for our development and progress." Lucas says, "The earth is a shared system with intrinsic value and humans have a responsibility to protect it, not to just exploit it." So have a think.

Does your view align with either of these and what has influenced your view on this? Pause the video, and if you're able to have a talk with somebody nearby, or you can talk to me and come back when you are ready to move on.

So let's check your understanding.

I'd like you to complete Sofia's sentence.

Sofia says, "I believe the earth has intrinsic value." So is the ending of her sentence A, because it is a commodity and provides resources we need to survive? Is it B, even if humans didn't exist to use or appreciate it? Or is it C, because of its ability to support human flourishing? So pause the video, choose your answer and come back when you're ready to check.

So well done if you put B.

The idea of intrinsic value means that the value is not dependent on anyone or anything else.

So let's practise our understanding on the value of the world.

Here's a case study which we're gonna read, and then I'd like you to answer the questions that follow.

A forest is being cleared to build a housing estate.

Some people argue the forest should be protected because it provides oxygen and prevents flooding.

Others say it should be protected just because it exists.

A, identify which argument relates to intrinsic value and which to extrinsic value.

Provide reasoning to support your answer.

B, reflect on the implications of each perspective.

How does each viewpoint influence the decision on whether the forest should be protected? So take your time to write full answers to both A and B, explaining which argument is intrinsic and which one is about extrinsic value and link it in with the decision about the forest.

Pause a video, take as long as you need to and come back when you're ready to look through your work.

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

You could have said, A, the argument that the forest should be valued just because it is part of nature relates to intrinsic value as it values the forest for its own sake.

The argument that the forest provides oxygen and prevents flooding relates to extrinsic value as it focuses on the forest usefulness to humans and views it as a commodity.

B, if the forest is seen as having intrinsic value, it would likely be protected no matter what because its existence is considered important.

If it's seen as having extrinsic value, the decision might depend on whether the benefits like oxygen and flood control outweigh the need for housing.

So well done if you identified which argument is which.

So both views might want to protect the forest, but for different reasons.

So let's move on and look at the second part of our lesson, Christian teachings on the value of the world.

Christians try to answer questions such as, is the earth ours to use as we see fit by consulting sources of authority including the Bible, church teachings.

And they might also use their conscience and reason which they see as God giving gifts to work out what to do.

They may interpret these sources differently or they may emphasise one more than another.

So let's have a look at Bible teachings as a source of wisdom and authority.

In Genesis 1:28, God says, "Be fruitful and increase in number.

Fill the earth and subdue it.

Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground." So this quotation suggests that God has given humanity authority over creation.

It can be interpreted in two ways.

It could be seen as permission to use the earth's resources as a commodity which will be dominion, or it could be seen as a call to care for and protect creation, which would be stewardship.

God saw that it was good.

This is a phrase that repeats throughout the creation story and Genesis 1:31, the story concludes with, "God saw all that he had made and it was very good." So thinking about this quotation, if God sees creation as good, it means everything has value and purpose.

This suggests creation has worth not because it is a commodity, but because God made it with care.

"You made them rulers over the works of your hands.

You put everything under their feet." This confirms that God has given humanity authority over creation.

So let's check your understanding, true or false.

The Bible says that humans are rulers over the earth.

Have a think about your answer and also think about why.

Pause if you need to and then come back when you are ready to check.

Well done if you put that that was true.

Why? Well, because the Bible says humans are rulers over the earth and this is stated in Psalm 8:6.

"You made them rulers over the works of your hands." So well done if you got that it was true, that one of the messages in the Bible is that humans have this power or authority over the earth.

So stewardship is the interpretation that we should consider the earth itself when we make decisions.

So it's seeing this idea of ruling and having authority as very much taking into account the best thing for the earth itself.

Dominion is often contrasted with stewardship and it's still an interpretation.

So it's understanding that message of authority, but it's seeing it more as prioritising humans over the earth when making decisions.

Now, traditionally Christians have had a mixture of these views and certainly in the past before we knew a lot about issues to do with environmental damage, we may have taken much more as a whole society, a dominion approach, whether we are religious or not thinking that humans have authority and we should prioritise ourselves.

Now in more recent years when people have become more environmentally aware, generally speaking, people do tend to think that although they do have that power over the earth, and we can of course use it to an extent, we should be much more responsible.

And that aligns much more with the Christian interpretation that God wants us to be stewards over the earth.

So what views have in common is that the earth has value and we should have authority over it, whether that's more of a responsible authority such as stewardship or more of a prioritising humans.

So stewardship links in with what most Christians, including those who belong to Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox traditions think.

Dominion, not a particularly common view nowadays, but a minority Christians would still hold this.

For example, some fundamentalist groups.

Stewardship really relates much more to emphasising the earth having an intrinsic value, although extrinsic factors would matter as well, whereas dominion is the other way.

Much more emphasising the idea that the earth is valuable because of what it does for humans.

Most Christian denominations agree on the value of creation and the importance of stewardship, which is caring for creation.

Evangelical Christianity teaches that stewardship is key to Christianity.

So it's a key part of being a Christian.

Roman Catholic Christianity teaches that stewardship is caring for God's gift of creation.

Orthodox Christianity teaches stewardship is a sacred responsibility, and the Anglican church teaches that stewardship should happen on behalf of future generations.

So let's check your understanding, what is stewardship? Is it A, marvelling at the complexity and beauty of the universe? Is it B, the God-given duty to humankind to look after the created world and all life within it? Is it C, the belief that humans have the right to use the earth however they wish? Or is it D, the belief that the earth has no value beyond human use? So take your time to think about your answer.

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

Well done if you put B, stewardship is the God given duty to humankind to look after the created world and all life within it.

So for your practise task, Sam is explaining why most Christians disagree with the statement the earth is humanity's to use as it sees fit.

She has made some mistakes, rewrite her explanation so that it is correct.

Sam has written, "Most Christians would disagree with the statement because Genesis 1:28 gives humans dominion over the earth, which means we can take whatever we want for ourselves.

We don't need to worry about the earth's wellbeing because it was made for our benefit and God's declaration that creation is good doesn't require us to protect it or consider the needs of other living things." So take some time to have a look carefully at what Sam's written and to correct it because she's made a few key errors here.

And explain why most Christians disagree with the idea that we can use the earth however we choose or as we see fit.

Pause the video, take your time and come back when you are ready to check through your work.

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

Most Christians would disagree with the statement because Genesis 1:28 gives human stewardship over the earth.

This means they have a responsibility to care for and protect the earth rather than a licence to use it however we please.

They would say that because God said creation was good, humans should go after the earth and make decisions that reflect a care for the wellbeing of the earth and all its creatures.

So well done if you spotted that Sam was explaining dominion where she needed to be explaining the idea of stewardship, which is responsibility for the earth.

So let's move on to the third part of our lesson, different views on the value of the world.

Danielle is a Roman Catholic and Charlie is a Baptist.

They are discussing their views on Genesis 1:28.

Danielle says, Genesis 1:28 teaches us to be stewards of the earth.

Stewardship involves caring for creation and protecting it for future generations.

While we can use the earth's resources, God's declaration that creation is good, reminds us to respect it.

Charlie says, "I agree, the words rule over in Genesis 1:28 mean we should be responsible stewards and manage creation wisely, not that we can do as we please with it." Asher attends a Pentecostal church.

He has been asked how he understands Genesis 1:28.

Asher says, "Genesis 1:28 gives humanity dominion over the earth, meaning we have the right to use its resources.

We should think about our needs and wants before considering the needs of other living things or the earth itself.

However, God declared creation to be good.

And so we have a responsibility to use these resources wisely." So how is Asher's view different from the view expressed by Danielle and Charlie? If you are able to turn and talk to someone nearby, please do.

You can pause the video, you can talk to me and come back when you're ready to move on.

In 2022 there was a survey which asked Americans their views on the value of the earth.

It categorised people based on whether they said they had a high, medium or a low religious commitment.

And it asked whether they agreed that God gave humans a duty to protect the earth and whether they agreed that climate change is a very serious problem.

92% of those with a high religious commitment agreed that God gave humans a duty to protect the earth and 42% that climate change is a very serious problem.

76% of those with a medium religious commitment agreed that God gave humans a duty to protect the earth.

And 55% agreed that climate change is a very serious problem.

24% of those with a low religious commitment agreed that God gave humans a duty to protect the earth.

And 72% agreed that climate change is a very serious problem.

What does this data tell us about what religious people believe about the value of the earth? Take some time, have a look at the table, pause the video and come back when you are ready.

The high percentage indicates a strong belief in stewardship where protecting the earth is seen as part of their duty to God.

So why might people with a high religious commitment worry less about climate change than those whose commitment is low? Have a look at the data and have a think about why that might be.

Pause and come back when you are ready.

So they might believe that God is in control of the world and perhaps trust in his plan.

So for them, climate change might not be as serious because they might think that it's something that God can deal with.

Let's check your understanding.

What are the missing words? Christians who value the earth for its intrinsic worth are more likely to emphasise than, pause the video.

Have a think about what those missing words are and come back when you are ready to check.

So well done if you put stewardship than dominion.

So intrinsic worth is much more related to the idea of being responsible just because the earth is what it is rather than having the power to use the earth as a commodity.

Diane is a humanist.

She has also been asked to give her view on Genesis 1:28.

She says, "As a member of humanist climate action, I don't believe that God gave us dominion or stewardship over the earth.

We don't need religious teachings to tell us that caring for the environment is important.

Instead, we rely on science and reason to understand how our actions impact the planet and future generations." So where does Diane agree with Christians and what does she disagree on? If you can talk to someone nearby, please do, pause the video.

You can always talk to me and then come back when you are ready to move on.

So let's check your understanding, true or false? Most Christians disagree with humanists and do not think we have a responsibility to look after the earth.

Have a think about your answer and also have a think about why you came to that conclusion.

Pause and come back when you are ready to check.

So well done if you put false.

The reason is that most Christians actually agree with humanists and they think we do have a responsibility to look after the earth.

For Christians, this is based on the idea that God set them up as stewards of creation.

Whereas for humanists, it's the idea of reason and science showing that we should care for creation.

So for your task C, you are going to look at a full evaluation question and you're going to use a statement about the use of the earth.

I would like you to write a paragraph to support a different point of view, and as you do so, show your understanding of non-religious arguments.

So here's the example of a full evaluation question.

It's based on a statement that we've thought about quite a bit today already, the earth is humanity's to use as we see fit.

Now usually when you did a full question, you would include quite a few sections.

So you would show reasoned arguments in support of this statement, you would give reasoned arguments to support a different point of view.

You would refer to religious arguments, you might refer to non-religious arguments, and you should reach a justified conclusion.

So today, you're just gonna focus on part of it and you're gonna develop your ability to evaluate by putting forward a different point of view on the question.

So that would mean a point of view that supports something other than the statement.

As you do so, make sure that you are putting together some arguments that express the reason why someone may not agree with that statement, that the earth is humanity's to use as we see fit.

Take your time.

You're gonna be writing a lengthy paragraph here.

So pause the video, give yourself some time, and come back when you are ready to check.

So there are lots of things that you could have written whilst evaluating this statement.

Remember, you are focusing on non-religious arguments that put forward a different point of view.

So you might have written, some non-religious people such as humanists believe that the earth is not simply ours to use as we wish.

They argue that we have a responsibility to care for the environment because our actions affect future generations and all living beings.

As members of Humanist Climate Action, they promote sustainable lifestyles and policies to protect the climate.

They believe that protecting the earth is an ethical choice, ensuring that future generations inherit a healthy world.

So well done if you use an example such as a humanist view here, and if you gave some reasons, and even better if you gave examples of how they might respond, so the sort of behaviour they might engage in.

In today's lesson on the value of the world and stewardship, we have looked at how most Christians, including Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant traditions interpret Genesis 1:28 as supporting stewardship, emphasising care for creation.

That a minority of Christians interpret it Genesis 1:28 as dominion believing humans have the right to use the earth as they see fit, that most Christians believe creation has intrinsic value because it was made by God and declared good, suggesting it should be respected and that non-religious perspectives such as humanism, emphasise caring for the earth based on reason and science rather than divine command.

Thank you for all your hard work today and for working through this lesson on the value of the world and stewardship.