A Thoughtful Reflection on Cicadas and Human Ethics
Written on
Chapter 1: The Intriguing Life of Cicadas
Recently, a friend shared some fascinating insights about cicadas, the loud and clumsy flying insects currently making their presence known in various parts of the US. These creatures are known for their large size and are a favored snack for birds, cats, dogs, and numerous other animals. In fact, aside from humans—who have a wide range of opinions about them—cicadas seem to be a popular meal choice among many species.
As noted by NBC News, cicadas spend “either 13 or 17 years underground, then emerge nearly simultaneously in densities that can exceed 1 million per acre… They do little to defend themselves. They fly poorly, don’t fight, and taste great. In the parlance of animal behavior, cicadas are ‘predator foolhardy’ — they are always available for lunch.”
How then do cicadas manage to survive? Their survival strategy is a remarkable one.
This paragraph will result in an indented block of text, typically used for quoting other text.
Section 1.1: The Survival Strategy of Cicadas
Cicadas employ a survival tactic known as “predator satiation.” My enthusiastic friend described it this way: “They emerge in such overwhelming numbers that predators simply can’t consume all of them. Isn’t that a brilliant strategy?”
I replied, “Not so brilliant if you’re one of the cicadas that gets eaten!” To which my friend countered, “True, but what if you’re among those who survive?”
This conversation led me to recognize cicadas as a prime example of utilitarianism in action. Utilitarianism is grounded in the principle of utility, emphasizing actions that benefit the majority. In this case, while many cicadas fall prey to predators, enough manage to survive, making the strategy effective overall. However, it’s important to note that this approach does not favor all cicadas, especially those who become meals for dogs.
Subsection 1.1.1: Contrasting Human Strategies
In contrast, the human approach to survival in 2020 can be described as Kantian. Unlike utilitarian thinkers, Kantians do not believe that an action is morally right simply because it yields positive outcomes for the majority.
As Rachel Sirotkin explains, “According to Kant, we should look at our maxims, or intentions, of the particular action. Kantians believe ‘human life is valuable because humans are the bearers of rational life’ (O’Neill 414). This perspective asserts that humans, as rational beings, should not be treated merely as means to an end.”
This belief might explain how we’ve made significant advancements in medicine and safety, leading to lower child mortality rates, the establishment of international laws aimed at reducing warfare, and the eradication of diseases like polio.
From the standpoint of cicadas, such a perspective seems illogical. They understand that for some to survive, others must perish.
However, most humans are appalled by the notion of sacrificing individuals for the benefit of the collective. We only tend to accept it if someone voluntarily gives their life for a greater cause—making them a hero in our eyes. (When cicadas meet their end, dogs simply consider them food.)
The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed a willingness among many humans to make sacrifices, such as practicing social distancing and wearing masks, to save lives. This inclination may stem from our biological makeup: humans generally produce fewer offspring compared to many other species. As taught in biology, “Organisms that make few offspring usually invest significant energy in each one and often provide substantial parental care. They are essentially ‘putting their eggs in one basket’ (literally, in some cases!) and are deeply invested in each offspring's survival.”
If this biological aspect explains our preference for Kantian ethics, I am grateful for it.
Unlike cicadas, many humans reject utilitarian survival strategies. This is evident in the global lockdowns implemented to protect vulnerable groups from COVID-19. Some individuals expressed dissatisfaction with these lockdowns. To those people, I would pose the question: “What’s the alternative? Would you really prefer to adopt cicadas' survival strategy and sacrifice some humans for the greater good (or the economy, as some politicians suggested)?”
Utilitarianism involves more risk than Kantianism because endorsing the idea that some individuals can be sacrificed opens the door to the possibility that one might become a casualty. Generally, people are only willing to accept this risk if they are certain they or their loved ones won’t be among those who suffer.
The deceased cicadas littering my sidewalk tell a different tale.
Join my email list if you’d like to (re)connect with your passion and purpose.
Chapter 2: Insights from Cicadas
The first video, titled "What to do with DEAD cicadas," explores various approaches to dealing with cicadas after they have completed their life cycle, emphasizing practical solutions and ecological considerations.
The second video, "Cicada Life & Death 3: Lots Of Beautiful Cicada Rescues," provides an educational perspective on cicada rescue efforts, showcasing the beauty and fragility of these insects while highlighting the importance of conservation.
An Injustice!
A new intersectional publication, geared towards voices, values, and identities!
aninjusticemag.com