Farmer In Chief Socratic Seminar

I felt the reading we had; Farmer In Chief - was a very educational and interesting piece. More than any of the facts, figures, and ideas mentioned in the article though, what I liked best was the tone of the article. As I mentioned in the Socratic seminar, the author did not take the stance that he had a point to make, and he would make the reader believe what he felt. Rather, he had a certain way that he felt about the issue, with certain ideas as to why things are the way they are, and how to fix them, and he provided his evidence that led him to these conclusions.

We spent much of our discussion hashing out the pros and cons of the plan suggested in the article, and whether or not it would be worth it to attempt to follow this advice. I believe our end conclusion was that this was a road we needed to head down, because the path we are on will not lead us anywhere good. However, we cannot expect to reach any desired results - such as an abundant supply of organic food for the world, drastically less reliance on fossil fuels, and an increase in public health and awareness - anytime soon. As the article stated, this is a process that would take at least 5 decades.

However, after reading this article, and hashing it out in the discussion in class, I can hardly find any reason to dislike or disapprove of this reading and what it suggests. Despite the cost, difficulty, and long time frame, I believe that this intricate, multiphase process of changing the way the world does food is not only beneficial, but necessary.