Diego Fernando Valenciano Claros Cod: 052100112019

The planet is fine (Theory of six readings practice)

Categorical reading

I think the author wants to try to deny and de-romanticize the "empathetic" attitude some
people have had when facing different environmental and natural problems, and also to
demonstrate the "anthropocentric" presumption of human beings to star in and be responsible
for these problems. I consider that we, as humanity, have caused abysmal havoc on the planet
and have left enormous amounts of pollution in various ecosystems, however, and as the
author declares in the text, it is important to keep in mind the planet has lived for a time
incomparable to ours as civilized humanity, in this order of ideas it would be absurd to think
that in all that time in which we have not been, the planet has not gone through some
"adversity" equal to or worse than us. It is evident the planet has gone through many other
problems and situations which have led it to change and transform itself to make adversity
more bearable, this shows us, it has the ability to save itself and also it does not need "to be
saved "as stated by the author. This led to the current situation, would lead us to think that the
virus could be a way to eradicate the "problem" from the perspective of planet earth, this is
how George exposes it to us.

In relation to the function of each paragraph, the first and second paragraph exposes the
premises the author has to argue the planet cannot and should not be saved by those naive
people who defend environmental and natural "problems", which in reality they are cycles
that have been repeated for many years, it is true that we have had a certain influence in many
cases, however it must be borne in mind that the planet itself must take care of any "plague"
that obstructs its evolution naturally. In the third and fourth paragraph, the main idea exposed
is the planet does not need to be saved, due to its capacity for self-repair and transformation,
but on the other hand, we as humans, for the planet and its different ecosystems, we represent
a "plague" that must be eradicated, this is why the author states that "the planet is perfectly,
compared to human beings", this means, due to our acts and activities that we have developed
over the years, It has led us to our own extinction, not the extinction of the planet itself. In the
case of the fifth paragraph, the author contextualizes the current situation and declares that
perhaps the virus that isolates us today is the way the planet has to eradicate us by
considering us a "plague", because our idea of civilization does not mean anything for the
planet. To finish, in the last paragraph he expresses his thought about the insignificance that
we have as a species within the great ecosystem that we inhabit, which will continue its
course no matter how much it is attacked.

Meta-semantic reading

First of all, the style of the text is quite informal, since it uses slang specific to American
culture, in this way the text becomes less complex and easier to understand, in this order of
ideas the repercussion of the thesis presented would have a range much broader, because it
does not require a very high comprehension and interpretation ability since the vocabulary
used is not very technical, According to its stylistic characteristics, I do not believe the author
Diego Fernando Valenciano Claros Cod: 052100112019

is a person who works in some scientific field, but he is a person capable of seeing broader
perspectives, which allow him to have a more critical attitude of things, however if He blinds
himself in some aspects, because I think those problems he exposes are much more complex
than just a "cycle", as he mentions it, or something that has to happen for the planet to
transform, and this is linked to socioeconomic aspects that have been the main cause of most
of the planet's ecosystem pollution and of the poaching of many species, and although the
planet has the capacity to lessen the damage, transforming the species, i do not think that
these types of practices are justifiable at all, because we are forcing them to disappear, and
therefore preventing their development and natural cycle in the ecosystem. Considering these
statements, I think yet, it is pertinent to protect the different ecosystems and their respective
species of fauna and flora, since we would be protecting them from ourselves due to the
danger that we represent as "civilized society", because we are the main cause of many non-
natural extinctions and also of an abysmal quantity of pollution,and so, the other species
which we should coexist, are not guilty by the fact that we have created a culture of
unconscious consume to subsist.

I think the article takes place at the current juncture, I refer to the recent events and the
problems concern us as humanity, i think this, because the author conveniently mentioned
that a possible way for the planet to get rid of us by consider ourselves as a "plague", it would
be a virus, because viruses pose a considerable threat to us and are microorganisms that are
the result of biological and natural mutations, considering these statements, I agree with the
theory that he manages regarding the cause of the virus that isolates us today. the article
showed me in a certain way a perspective that I had not contemplated before, because the
author affirms that the planet has the ability to save itself and the natural phenomena which
have caused so many tragedies are a way of "solving" the problem, and sincerely It does not
sound so illogical to me, but as I said before, I differ in his opinion, that these initiatives,
however arrogant they may be, can save species and make ecosystems as pleasant and
habitable places as they should be by nature.