# data[].attributes.headline
Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument? 

# data[].attributes.headline
How do language and vocabulary influence the way we approach living [on the earth]? What impact does changing the way we talk about issues and the words we use have on individuals and societies?

# data[].attributes.subject
How do language and vocabulary influence the way we approach living [on the earth]? What impact does changing the way we talk about issues and the words we use have on individuals and societies?

# data[].attributes.headline
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.headline
How do language and vocabulary influence the way we approach living [on the earth]? What impact does changing the way we talk about issues and the words we use have on individuals and societies?

# data[].attributes.subject
How do language and vocabulary influence the way we approach living [on the earth]? What impact does changing the way we talk about issues and the words we use have on individuals and societies?

# data[].attributes.body
In consideration of today’s society and the influence of technology, the impacts of language and vocabulary are especially evident in the power and influence of social media trends. Although the ethics of social media influence is debatable, there is no doubt that it has greatly impacted society and the ways we perceive and interact with each other as well as our environments. Acronyms such as BLM, AAPI, BIPOC and terms like climate justice, sustainability, decolonization, etc. have been widely used due to the influence of the media. Subsequently, many debates around current and historical events associated with these terms are more frequently debated and conversed. With consideration of modern technology, I personally believe that introducing new language and terminology sparks new conversations and active evaluations that therefore promote more conscious choices — choices of words that then influence action on the individual and societal levels.

# data[].attributes.body
How would the use of the term “anthropocene” impact systems of education? (In consideration of current environmental debates and denials of climate change, how would the use of anthropocene impact current social-political dynamics or vice versa?)

# data[].attributes.headline
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.body
This question is difficult for me because I begin to question the purpose of writing and literature. I land in a place of neutrality, and disagree with the one-sided mindset of the question. In order to initiate change on a large scale, there cannot be one way of writing, reading, protesting, or processing. In my opinion, passion and devotion to a large cause is further supported when there is an emotional connection or reaction to the issue as well.
There is no right and wrong way to express feelings/ideas through literature, I'd take an angry or depressing poem over a climate war any day.

# data[].attributes.body
Why is it important to question bias of literature, and how can we identify differences between truths and beliefs?

# data[].attributes.headline
Are humans a part of nature or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.subject
Are humans a part of nature or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that humans are a part of nature, and that defining ourselves as anything different removes us from the world we live in.

But there is also harm in saying that we are only what nature made us, as this absolves us of guilt or responsibility.

Romanticism and transcendentalism argue that humans were once a part of nature, but are now apart from it. (They also argue that we need to return to nature.)

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.body
There is always inherent bias in art, no matter the form. I think it’s impossible to write entirely without bias. It's impossible to see and process the world without bias.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, I don't believe it is possible to write or even exist without some level of bias. It doesn't have to be something major but everyone has their own personal opinions and biases on things. Take something small like ice cream, for example, people will most likely have differing opinions on flavors. Ideally, we should aim to write in a neutral way in order to keep it as accurate as possible, but that is a hefty ask in this society.

So while writing without biases would be beneficial and would tell a more accurate view of history and events, it is, in my opinion, impossible to do so.

# data[].attributes.body
How can we tell if something was written with bias, is there a specific way things are written that indicate biases are included?

# data[].attributes.headline
Are humans a part of nature or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.subject
Are humans a part of nature or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that humans are a part of nature. Nature is a very broad term, but the definition that I go by is the organic world and everything that has occurred or been created without intervention of any living species (e.g rocks or lakes). Humans are a part of nature, but the things we create aren’t necessarily a part of nature. Looking back to the age of hunter / gatherers, there was nothing unnatural about this era, humans completely used the natural resources in the ways they had been used for millions of years.

# data[].attributes.body
If humans used to be completely natural, at what stage of our advancement did we start creating or using unnatural things. Was it tools? Farming? Architecture?

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way? (Rafi)

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way? (Rafi)

# data[].attributes.body
Whenever you write, you write from a place of bias. You can try minimize that by listening to or empathizing with other perspectives, but at the end of the day, your writing will always be influenced by you, and because of that, I think writing without the bias of humanity is a futile effort. We can try to counteract it by being conscious of that bias and considering how other species might see things, but until we know the capacity other animals have for thought and emotions, I don't see how that is practically possible.

Question: Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

Does the answer change if we specify reading or writing literature

# data[].attributes.headline
(Ross) Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.subject
(Ross) Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.body
Humans are part of nature but in an evolving society full of high-rises, ready to go meals and comfortable lifestyles, many people act apart from nature. But anything that affects the earth I most certainly believe plays apart in nature. Literature describing both arguments seem to be constantly evolving but for the “apart” side only in the past century has it grown.

Does the evolution of modern comfortably destroy the respect we have for nature and are planet?

# data[].attributes.headline
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change? (Elyse)

# data[].attributes.subject
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change? (Elyse)

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that we should use literature in many ways, including both processing and progress. It is a tool and art form for humans to examine, create, and benefit from; because of this, I think there should be no limit or expectations to how we should "use" literature. Is it possible to process emotions and incite change in the same text? Why/how or why not?

# data[].attributes.body
Why do humans tend to think within such a binary? Is there any benefit (comfortability, ease) to this phenomenon? Is there any harm (exclusivity, assumption)?

# data[].attributes.headline
are humans a part of nature or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument? (Ben)

# data[].attributes.subject
are humans a part of nature or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument? (Ben)

# data[].attributes.body
I believe humans are a part of nature. I believe that humans also can shape what nature becomes. I believe that humans can either destroy nature or we can help nature thrive. Most literature in recent history has said that humans are apart of nature

# data[].attributes.headline
Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.subject
Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.body
Humans are definitely a "part of nature" just as much as trees, fish, or even rocks are. I think an awareness of the necessity to exist in and around nature with respect to balance and our own position in it is a mindset that is in opposition to industrial capitalism, a philosophy monopolized in Europe in tandem with colonization. I think there is a dichotomy between claiming literature as a major proponent of the argument of human in/out of nature, as I think it's somewhat the case that what we consider literature, and what we might consider the most relevant literature was produced almost exclusively in the post-colonial era, where much more of the global population grew up living in a world significantly more structured around the ideologies and results of capitalism; as well, some of what I would consider to be the most relevant cultural knowledge for this argument originates before and was inundated in the pre-colonial era, and existed in ways (verbally, ways of life) that were particularly vulnerable to the violent assault of colonialism and therefore I think to accurately discuss the issues and dichotomies of the Anthropocene we must expand our definition of literature to include the cultural knowledge and other systems Of knowledge whose presence and/or lack of presence in our discussion is indicative of the very origins of the Anthropocene and its disproportionate effects and injustice.
fraser

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.body
What would you consider the "bias of humanity"? I feel like it's impossible to write outside the bias of humanity and we should strive to write consciously within it instead. Having "humanity" feels like something we can't avoid and were born into and live with everyday, and the best we can do is write and think reflectively/embrace it and that's better than trying to write without it.
fraser

# data[].attributes.headline
How do language and vocabulary influence the way we approach living [on the earth]? What impact does changing the way we talk about issues and the words we use have on individuals and societies? 

# data[].attributes.subject
How do language and vocabulary influence the way we approach living [on the earth]? What impact does changing the way we talk about issues and the words we use have on individuals and societies? 

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the words we choose have a large effect over the way we approach living. Language evokes strong emotions, and talking about important issues in a closed off way can create a wave of inevitable despair and a lack of motivation to create change. The misuse of certain terms also allows for misconception of meaning and throwing around important and significant terms aimlessly. The terms we use when speaking about change in the world influences the way information is processed. For example, the lack of a conclusive definition of the word “anthropocene,” or the debate of if it is a geological era at all, can create confusion on an individual and society level. (brooke)

# data[].attributes.headline
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.body
Question: What is the downside to using literature to process emotions and incite change? (brooke)

# data[].attributes.body
Isn’t everything technically a part of nature because everything stems from it? If not then what is the difference?

# data[].attributes.headline
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should we use literature to process emotions or incite change?

# data[].attributes.body
I think that anyone can use any method to process emotions or incite change that works for them. Finding a way to do this is very important and healthy but it shouldn’t be expected that everyone uses the same methods. I don’t think it is a should or shouldn’t.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we write without the bias of humanity? Should we aim to write that way?

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think it's possible to write without humanity influencing literature. Anything we do is influenced by past actions that have been made by humanity. Being creative, learning, and doing will always have parts influenced by someone else, and have already been done before. It is impossible to be 100% original and think completely freely because growing up and living in a society means being affected by the societal way of thinking, regardless of where you live. With that being said, we have to aim to write without bias in order to continue the growth in literature. If we do not attempt to get away from bias no progression will be made.

Q: Can writing with bias be good? In what ways and how?

tanya

# data[].attributes.body
Who decides when a piece of writing has bias in it and why does that make the writing untrustworthy?

# data[].attributes.headline
Are humans a part of or apart from nature?

# data[].attributes.subject
Are humans a part of or apart from nature?

# data[].attributes.body
I think this question can have a different answer to everybody, and I'm not sure what my own definitive answer is. First of, the question relies very heavily on the definition of nature. Oftentimes, nature is defined (or recognized) as bunch of trees in a field with deer and flowers, etc etc etc. When you search up "nature defintion," the internet says it is in opposition to humans. And even the act of defining nature can separate us from it in some ways. However, I still believe there is an argument to be made for humans being apart of nature because it brings up the question of when we separated? If humans aren't a part of nature, then were we created that way or is there some time in history that separated us? Personally, I believe that we can still be apart of nature and be causing it harm, for we are causing ourselves harm as well. We live within the confines of nature. Maybe a separation of the ideas of nature and the natural world aid this question (Maybe humans are a part of nature and have distanced themselves from the natural world?)

# data[].attributes.headline
Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.subject
Are humans a part of or apart from nature? How do certain eras/types of literature support either argument?

# data[].attributes.body
I think certain eras of literature romanticize the separation of humans from nature, specifically transcendentalism. I think humans have lost sign of how we play a part in nature & how as animals, we too are part of that narrative.

Q: What would writing humans into the narrative of nature look like?

Nat