Beware the ‘Appeal to Nature’
To the editor:
The front-page article in the Sept. 6 issue titled “Culling Seals Is Wrong Answer to Shark Threat, Scientists Say”) is a fine example of the rhetorical device (and logical fallacy) known as the “appeal to nature.”
It may well be that infestation by sharks and seals is the natural state of our local waters. This can tell us nothing, however, about what is good or right, or what we ought to do.
Adding “scientists say” at the end of the headline merely compounds the fallacy: scientists can only tell us (with decidedly mixed results) what to expect from the natural world in response to various courses of action. They have, however, no privileged position in ethics or policymaking.
The history of civilization is, in general terms, the history of humanity’s increasing control of nature. We all remember a time when we swam in the Cape’s waters without fear of deadly attack; this was surely due to the seal bounty that had been in effect since the 19th century.
Reversion to a “state of nature” is generally a thing to be avoided in human affairs. Perhaps it would better have been avoided here as well.
—Malcolm Pollack, Wellfleet
Carlson’s HDYLTA Recusal
To the editor:
I am writing regarding your article “Wellfleet Struggles With Leadership Crisis” [online, Aug. 16] and the letter from Wil Sullivan [online, Aug. 29] that followed. In his letter Sullivan criticized select board member Justina Carlson for signing the June 22 HDYLTA shellfish flats purchase and sale agreement and then later declining to participate in a select board discussion of the purchase.
Ms. Carlson had been very clear about her reason for not participating in deliberations concerning the HDYLTA property. She explained that, although she had received a legal opinion stating that she did not have a conflict of interest, she nevertheless felt that she should recuse herself from select board discussions and votes because of a personal relationship. Despite her recusal Carlson later participated in the June signing of the HDYLTA purchase and sale agreement so that the document would have the required number of legal signatures, thereby enabling the select board to proceed as scheduled. (Helen Wilson had become ineligible to sign because of her million-dollar pledge toward the cost of the town’s purchase.)
Carlson cannot, based on these facts, be said to have abandoned or contradicted her earlier decision to recuse herself from substantive discussions. Her act of signing was strictly administrative, or ministerial. It was an act that was necessarily taken to enable the select board to implement the decision that the town’s voters had made at our annual town meeting, when we heartily approved money for the HDYLTA purchase.
Carlson had spoken in support of the purchase at town meeting. She walked to the public microphone to speak, which indicated that she was electing to exercise her right to speak as a resident voter, and that she was not speaking as a select board member.
—Gail Ferguson, Wellfleet
An Island Institute Fan
To the editor:
David Panagore’s column about the Island Institute in Rockland, Maine [Oct. 10, page 3] was especially interesting to me because that is just across the water from my family place in Vinalhaven, and we’ve been members for years. Everything the article says is absolutely true.
—Katharine Baker, Northampton and North Truro
Setting a Standard
To the editor:
Congratulations on your launch of The Provincetown Independent. The first print issues demonstrate a range of reporting and a quality of writing that portends success. In an era of declining local journalism, you have set a new standard for press revival.
—L. Michael Hager, Eastham
