Let us live on a healthy earth...
The answer lies in what Robert Swan, the first person to walk to both poles, said: 'The greatest threat to our planet is the belief that someone else will save it.'
Whether climate change is an effect that is caused by natural processes, manmade activity or the combination of the two, what is visible is that changes are happening to the Earth's climate. And this is creating a strain on our environment.
I am not an environmental expert, nor am I mindfulness professional. But still, there is ample scientific evidence that the climate is changing and that the change is being influenced by a host of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.
The only thing I can say, as a layman, is the changing weather patterns are going to force us to make more immediate and drastic changes to our existing infrastructure.
It is clear that climate change, biodiversity loss, and other environmental issues are threatening the very foundation of our existence. So saving the earth is not merely the need of the hour but much more.
Unfortunately, the only home we have is at a breaking point. It is even messier. We have damaged two-thirds of the earth's oceans and three-quarters of its land.
These man-made changes to nature, as well as crimes that disrupt biodiversity, have gathered more pace, leading to the destruction of the planet. The final result is that millions of people are affected by extreme heat, wildfires, and floods.
So saving the earth is not merely the need of the hour but much more. We need a healthier plant. We need nature more than it needs us. Our world has been changing and will continue to change — with or without us. Saving biodiversity and ecosystem by ecosystem, is the only way to save ourselves!
April is Earth Month, a time when many people around the world come together to celebrate and raise awareness about environmental issues and take action to protect our planet. While Earth Month started as a movement in the 1960s, the first Earth Day was organised on April 22, 1970.
Unlike any other annual event, Earth Day serves as a yearly 'wake-up call,' shaking us out of complacency and urging us to confront the harsh reality of our impact on the planet. Climate change, pollution, deforestation and biodiversity loss are no longer distant threats.
Planting one single tree a year is a simple way to contribute to the environment because we believe that trees are nature's soldiers in the fight against global warming.
In this context is The Overstory, the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel by American novelist Richard Powers. Though I may be one of the last to put my hands on the book so late, it reminded me of what I had forgotten — the wordless understanding I had about trees. Rather, it is a reminder of our environmental consciousness.
The humans are not the important part of this book. It's the idea of how we relate to trees and nature itself. It's about the realisation that trees will find a way, with or without us. The novel provides an intimate case study of environmentalism.
The novel stresses the need for co-existence of humans and non-humans this planet. 'All around the house, the things they've planted in years gone by are making significance, making meaning, as easily as they make sugar and wood from nothing, from air, and sun, and rain. But the humans hear nothing,' Powers writes.
The Overstory inspires its readers to do more, act more for their planet. As the world still celebrating the Earth Month, let this novel be an inspiration to contemplate our relationship with nature.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
10-07-2025
- Observer
When teaching teaches you: Lessons beyond the lecture
Have you ever stopped to consider what you are learning from the very act of teaching? Amid the flurry of assignments, exams, and relentless administrative demands, this essential question often gets buried beneath daily routines. Yet, it is perhaps the most profound question an educator can ask — particularly in higher education, where our role extends beyond simply imparting knowledge to shaping lives and nurturing future thinkers. John Dewey, the great American philosopher and educational reformer, emphasised that true learning arises from the interplay of experience and reflection. Teaching is not merely a transfer of information from one mind to another; it is a shared journey where both teacher and student grow together. When educators fail to consider what they are learning from their own teaching, the classroom risks becoming a static space, disconnected from the dynamism of real intellectual discovery. Today's universities and colleges are increasingly driven by rigid schedules, performance metrics, and administrative checklists. Assignments, mid-term tests, and final exams pile up not always as carefully crafted learning opportunities but as institutional requirements to measure progress and justify outcomes. Have these assessments been thoughtfully aligned with the actual learning needs and aspirations of students? Or are they designed to fulfill accreditation and reporting obligations rather than cultivate genuine understanding? Academics frequently find themselves struggling to balance their core mission — teaching and mentoring students — with a growing mountain of administrative demands. According to Marginson (2016), administrative duties can consume up to one-third of an academic's workload. As a result, opportunities for in-depth dialogue and personalised feedback diminish. The rich, formative feedback that John Hattie (2009) identifies as a major driver of student achievement often gets reduced to brief, generic comments. Students desire meaningful feedback that guides them, challenges them, and validates their efforts. When this is sacrificed for document uploads and compliance checks, it signals a troubling shift in our priorities. Furthermore, what is more important: investing time to teach with depth and authenticity, or uploading hundreds of documents within tight deadlines? This tension highlights a deeper question about the purpose of higher education. Are we primarily caretakers of bureaucratic processes, or are we mentors entrusted with developing critical thinkers and responsible citizens? Ramsden (2003) argued that effective teaching is not simply about delivering content but creating an environment where students see themselves as capable and curious learners. From the student perspective, universities should be spaces of exploration and intellectual challenge. Yet, when overwhelmed by continuous assessment and a focus on grades, students often shift from a learning mindset to a survival mindset. Biggs and Tang (2011) introduced the concept of constructive alignment, stressing that teaching activities, learning outcomes, and assessments should work together in harmony. When misaligned, they create confusion and disengagement rather than curiosity and growth. For educators, genuine learning from teaching emerges through listening deeply to students' questions, reflecting on classroom dynamics, and embracing moments when students push us to reconsider our perspectives. Stephen Brookfield (1995) reminds us that teachers learn most about their craft when they examine their assumptions and remain open to student feedback. Every lecture, discussion, and office hour encounter offers an opportunity for reciprocal growth. Educational leadership theorists such as Fullan (2007) also highlight that sustainable educational improvement depends on fostering a culture of continuous learning among teachers. When faculty are encouraged to reflect on their own teaching practices, they become more adaptable, innovative, and empathetic. This culture, however, cannot flourish when educators are overburdened by administrative tasks that dilute their focus and passion. If we truly want to cultivate a vibrant academic community, we must re-examine the structures that govern our work. Reducing unnecessary administrative burdens, creating space for genuine feedback, and valuing reflective practice are crucial steps. We must remember that our primary responsibility is not to systems or schedules but to the students who entrust us with their learning journeys. Ultimately, the most impactful teaching occurs when educators themselves remain lifelong learners — constantly evolving, questioning, and growing alongside their students. By asking, 'What am I learning from what I am teaching?' we honour the essence of education as a shared voyage of discovery rather than a mechanical transaction of knowledge. As teachers, the courage to reflect and the willingness to learn anew are perhaps the greatest lessons we can embed and impart. Mohammed Anwar Al Balushi The writer is a senior lecturer at Middle East College
Observer
03-07-2025
- Observer
Why managers must hear their employees
In the corridors of modern workplaces, amidst the buzz of technology and the pursuit of productivity, there lingers a persistent silence, not of absence, but of avoidance. One of the most recurring challenges faced by employees today is that their managers simply do not listen to them. This is not just a communication gap; it is a crisis of leadership, empathy, and organisational culture. Listening, in its true essence, is not merely about hearing words. It is about understanding, validating, and creating space for others to contribute meaningfully. As Ernest Hemingway once said, 'When people talk, listen completely. Most people never listen.' The tragedy is that in many offices, this form of complete listening is rare. But why do some managers fail to listen? Often, it stems from an illusion of hierarchy. Once seated in positions of authority, some individuals begin to see themselves not as enablers but as enforcers. Their identity is tied not to shared goals but to status, control, and the need to assert superiority. In this mindset, employee voices are seen as interruptions, not inputs. This managerial deafness is not just harmful; it is dangerous. The German philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe observed, 'A man hears only what he understands.' This quote pierces the heart of the problem. Many managers do not understand the lived experiences of their teams and hence cannot truly hear them. Detached from the operational realities, they often operate in abstraction, responding more to metrics than to the human stories behind them. What happens when employees are not heard? They disengage. They stop contributing ideas. Innovation slows, morale dips, and the workplace becomes transactional and mechanical. In contrast, when employees feel heard, they feel respected. And respect is the soil where trust grows. As Stephen R. Covey rightly put it, 'Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.' This reactive listening needs to be replaced by what Carl Rogers, the father of humanistic psychology, called 'active listening', a practice that involves empathy, openness, and full presence. Listening is, therefore, more than a managerial skill; it is a moral responsibility. Managers must recognise that listening is not a weakness; it is a form of leadership. It shows humility, and humility breeds authenticity. In workplaces where leaders genuinely listen, employees do not just work; they thrive. They bring their whole selves to the table, ideas, doubts, aspirations, and solutions. Moreover, the act of listening is transformative. It turns meetings into dialogues, hierarchies into collaborations, and problems into shared challenges. The American poet and philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote, 'The invariable mark of wisdom is to see the miraculous in the common.' The miracle of listening lies in its simplicity; it costs nothing but gives everything. Organisations that champion a listening culture experience stronger performance. This is not coincidental. Studies in organisational behaviour show that companies with high levels of employee voice see better decision-making, improved retention, and increased innovation. When people feel safe to speak up and are heard, they become partners, not just workers. So, what can be done? First, managers must train themselves to pause. The speed of modern business tempts leaders to rush through interactions. But silence is not an enemy. As the philosopher Epictetus noted, 'We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.' Second, organisations should embed listening into leadership KPIs. Managers must be evaluated not only on results, but on relationships. Third, employees must be empowered to provide feedback about whether they feel heard. Tools, surveys, and one-on-ones must go beyond formality and invite genuine conversation. Fourth, leaders should model vulnerability. When managers share their own challenges and ask for input, it normalises openness. Listening is not about agreeing; it is about acknowledging. It is about saying: 'I see you. I hear you. You matter.' In the symphony of the workplace, every voice contributes to harmony. When managers stop listening, they mute potential. When they begin to listen, truly listen, they unlock something powerful, not just in their teams, but in themselves. The future of leadership is not in shouting commands from corner offices, but in sitting down, leaning in, and saying, 'Tell me what you think.' Because sometimes, the simplest act of listening is the most revolutionary step a manager can take.
Observer
14-06-2025
- Observer
Adding a ‘SPLASH of COLOUR' with Words.
Metaphors, idioms and colloquialisms have become an ever-increasing component of the English language, therefore making it difficult for English as a second language learners to keep their heads about them in the face of what I see as the 'metaphorical gymnastics' what is now the global language. It may be somewhat of a challenge you see, for a non-English speaker to recognise the true meaning of a comment that someone is 'showing their true colours now.' The actual meaning is that the person has revealed their true manner, nature or character now. This usually occurs due to a change in their circumstances or relationship. It has nothing to do with what colour the person is, is wearing, or any part of their appearance, but is a metaphor for their manner, the way they treat or react to people; their nature, the way they behave towards others; or their character, their distinctive mental and moral qualities. The word 'colour,' in fact has a genuine diversity within the English language that is probably not helped, in language learning, by the fact that the word is spelled differently in the Americas, with the spelling of 'color,' not at all indicative of any difference in meaning. 'Colour' and 'color' mean the same thing but are drawn from different origins and in the matter of the differences in linguistic standardisation on the two sides of the Atlantic, the derivations result from whether the words have Latin or French origin. America, seeking even subtle forms of independence in the early 19th century, eagerly embraced the spelling differences published by the American lexicographer Noah Webster in his 1828 dictionary. There are hundreds of words, not only spelled differently 'on either side of the pond,' which is itself a metaphor describing the Atlantic Ocean as a pond and referring to the two (American and United Kingdom) civilisations without naming them, in an absolute example of how identifying the differentiation between idioms and colloquialisms can challenge the language learner. The reality is that they don't have to and can take comfort in the fact that beyond a lesson or two, they will find that 'knowing' the difference is less important than understanding that this amazing language is, in common use, as likely to be figurative, as literal. Familiarisation is the only way to both understand, absorb and utilise even some of the idioms and colloquialisms they will encounter in life. However, that familiarisation will be greatly enhanced by embracing metaphors and synonyms, which sounds dreary, but can be fun. The distinction, linguistically, is that an idiom has a non-literal meaning, while a colloquialism is a phrase that is likely to be in common usage, based upon regional specificity. Now there is no way that an English language learner would identify the Atlantic as a 'pond,' because in fact, it's a massive great ocean, so the use of the word 'pond' is clearly not literal, making it an idiom. Wouldn't you agree? Yet, the reference to 'either side of the pond,' is also clearly a unique distinction, most likely made by someone from either the States, or the British Isles, therefore regional, therefore more correctly a colloquialism, correct? Such are the joys of this amazing language, which, used well, or heard and understood well, and with an extensive enough vocabulary, can add so much colour, there's that word again, to any discussion or conversation. Wait a minute! What's the difference between a discussion and a conversation? Is there a difference? Yes! A discussion is probably more formal, more structured, focused, usually on a specific issue, between several people and will usually have stated objectives. Whereas, on the other hand, a conversation is generally informal, usually between two people, usually personal, often private, humorous, anecdotal and more intimate, a 'shared' experience. I know, you're thinking 'It's alright for you. You're English.' And you are right of course, but within any language lies lifelong personal enrichment and that can't be bad... Can it?
