Cronon believes that wilderness is an unexamined foundation and has used historical events to trace back the origins of the concept of wilderness. Cronon used references to the Bible, the 19th-century period of romanticism, and the frontier myth to further explain his standpoint. By doing so, Cronon acknowledged in An Other-Than-Human World: The Social Constructivist that the concept of wilderness is not the same thing as the place of wilderness and believes wilderness is a cultural invention (Woods 4). Cronon emphasizes that wilderness is an idea that is entirely made up of humans and pushes others to acknowledge that wilderness does exist but does not stem from human beings. Vogel's approach to the wilderness was more direct. For instance, Vogel believes that what we call nature or…show more content… The difference between Vogel and Cronon's account of nature and wilderness is that Cronon believes that humans should recognize and honor the place of the wilderness as something that we did not create. Vogel thinks that what humans know as nature, which can also be true for the wilderness, has already been socially constructed due to language and social practices that mediate it. Another feature is that Vogel would agree with the third premise, that because concepts such as nature and wilderness are often socially constructed, it means that there are no natural areas that exist in the depths of human cultures (13). Wood’s endorses the idea that human social discourse does mediate how humans come to know the world, yet he rejects the third premise of the social constructivist argument. Woods believes there is a spectrum of social constructivism where, on one end, it is common sense realism, a belief that wilderness exists apart from human perception and
