Day Game, 1972 by David Stoltz. Picture taken at Storm King Arts Center.

One of the objectives I had set out to achieve through this independent study was to increase accessibility to sustainable initiatives like biomimicry. My academic advisor, Prof. Cohen, assisted me in this effort by allowing me to lead a class discussion for the advanced engineering studies elective “Technology and Nature” course. As the course description states, “the main point of the class is to help students develop a nuanced understanding of the interactions amongst and between technology and nature. Our goal is to consider how we might develop technologies that sustain, rather than undermine, ecological health.” This course provided the perfect backdrop to engage college students in a discussion surrounding biomimicry and its impacts on society, the environment, and technology. This took place over two class periods. In preparation for the first-class discussion, students were asked to read “A Paradigm Shift: Biomimicry” b Phillip A. Reed, read over and watch the content displayed on the main “What is Biomimicry” page of the Biomimicry Institute’s website, and spend at least 15 minutes exploring the general website. This material was selected to give the students a broader understanding of how biomimicry is defined, Janine Benyus’s part in the movement, and provide some basic biomimetic examples. Prior to the second-class discussion, students were asked to read “Biomimicry and the Problem of Praxis” by Freya Mathews (see previous blog post). This reading allowed the students to develop a deeper understanding of biomimicry and its potential impacts. We walked through it together and broke down some of the key terms used throughout. Through both discussions, we explored the relationship between biomimicry, technology, the environment, and society. Talking and reflecting on Technology and Nature provided me with a deeper appreciation for having the time and space to analyze such fields as biomimicry that work towards a more sustainable future. The questions and notes from both class discussions are listed below.

Day 1 Discussion Questions/Notes:

  • Have you ever heard about biomimicry before this reading assignment?
    • Only about half the class knew about biomimicry before the reading, and those that had heard of it before defined it differently.
    • One student was first introduced to it through an example on a standardized test (ACT or SAT) … crazy!
    • Students mentioned they were not aware that there was a specified concept that links together nature and technology.
    • Appreciated the terminology “Nature as a Model, Measure, and Mentor”.
  • What is your understanding of technology and nature? What is technology?
    • Students mentioned that in class, they try to focus on how society might use nature as a utility and why it is vital that we move away from this mindset.
    • We talked a lot about the separation between nature and society and how defining something separates it from you in a way because it puts you on the outside of whatever you are defining. We also discussed that there is no one clear definition of these topics. There is a plethora of them because it is dependent on one’s perspective and association with technology/nature.
    • A philosophical take… Nature is reasonable and limitless. We are only dealing with nature that we can understand. We are a very small aspect of all that is possible to be a part of nature.
    • Whatever we say about nature is based on the cultural notions that we embody.
  • Now that you have learned a little about biomimicry, what are some key takeaways that you found interesting from the reading? How would you define biomimicry?
    • They found the termite example interesting especially because it changes the way we think about something traditionally seen as a pest. (See Blog Post #)
    • Students asked if we are replicating nature by trying to find examples within nature. We had a discussion that maybe we are just acting as our own nature and doing our part in this system to try and thrive as our biology encourages us to. This was an interesting take!
    • We explored how humans often yearn for modernity which means optimization. Biomimicry seems to be another method of this.
    • Also found the wasp Janine Benyus used in her 2009 Tedtalk discussion interesting because it provides evidence as humans always define themselves as separate from nature. It would not have been natural if humans have constructed the home instead of the wasps.

Day 2 Discussion Questions/Notes:

  • What does praxis mean?
    • Human values and society at large
    • Article kind of shows where the theory part of praxes comes from
    • Might help recognize why theory is important… your understanding of what you are doing and why you are doing it. It’s Like an ethical guiding principle.
  • What does the Anthropocene/anthropocentric mean?
    • There was a large range of familiarity with this concept. The geology and environmental science majors associated the Anthropocene with a geological shift. Other students defined it more closely as a societal shift naming the Industrial Revolution as the likely onset of the Anthropocene.
    • Everyone agreed that the Anthropocene does not have a clear time frame, but it is more about the idea that humans have centralized. I would argue that the concrete definition is less important than the idea and its purpose.
  • What does bio-inclusive mean and why did the author use it in replace ecocentric/biocentric?
    • Students noted that there is so much other terminology and so many different meanings especially with biocentric. This can cause a great deal of confusion between different disciplines and may even lead to inaction.
    • Students agreed that bio-inclusive seems to be a good term to use because biocentric and ecocentric imply that we are separate and valued differently from non-human nature.
  • What does historical materialism mean?
    • A common theme from the Technology and Nature class was that “technologies are value embedded”. As opposed to the idea that technologies are neutral or non-human, technologies are human activities. Sociotechnical systems are a way to avoid these dichotomies.
    • Sociotechnical systems are historical.
    • A student noted that it seems that one of the main adjustments we make is through changing the kind of social relationships we have (top-down or bottom-up).
      • Ecomodernism is more technically top-down, and biomimicry seems that it is supposed to be bottom-up.
  • What was the author’s reference to a value shift and the two resulting levels?
    • We reviewed the sections of the text that referenced a value shift together.
    • Must find ways to allow people to appreciate nature as a series of self-producing systems.
  • What is biosynergy?
    • We also reviewed these sections together.
    • Our historical materialism/values are getting in the way of a world in which biosynergy prevails.
    • Humans and the capitalist systems in which we live (at least in “developed” nations) promote convenience and immediate gratification over sustainability. In other words, it is very anthropocentric. We are very resistant to sacrifice, and biomimicry/sustainable practices often require a short-term sacrifice for a long-term gain.
      • It is important to note that this is very dependent on cultures and perspectives as mentioned previously. Religions often see sacrifice in a positive light. In a secular world, sacrifice won’t cut it. This world requires supplemental benefits like saving money. For biosynergy and bio-inclusivity to succeed, they must be promoted in a way that makes it easy for people to identify the benefits over the sacrifices.

This discussion allowed me to share what I have learned so far this semester with a very insightful class who has had their own semester of research focusing on technologies’ influence on society and nature. Their perspectives gave me a greater understanding of and appreciation of biomimicry and its place in society. I am very grateful for this experience and hope the students continue to interact with sustainable initiatives like biomimicry through both praxes and direct actions.

References:

  1. “A Paradigm Shift: Biomimicry” by Philip A. Reed (2004) accessed through ODU Digital Commons: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/stemps_fac_pubs/154/
  2. “What is Biomimicry?” summary on the Biomimicry Institute’s website: https://biomimicry.org/what-is-biomimicry/
  3. The Biomimicry Institute’s website: https://biomimicry.org/
  4. “Biomimicry in Action” Tedtalk by Janine Benyus (2009) accessed through YouTube: https://www.ted.com/talks/janine_benyus_biomimicry_in_action?language=en
  5. “Biomimicry and the Problem of Praxis” by Freya Mathews (2019) accessed through Research Gate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334586603_Biomimicry_and_the_Problem_of_Praxis
  6. EGRS 373 Technology and Nature Course Description: https://lafayette.smartcatalogiq.com/en/current/Catalog/Courses/EGRS-Engineering-Studies/300/EGRS-373