The Human- Nature Relationship In The Context Of Theo-Centric Environmental Ethics

The anthropocentrism debate, which centers on the place and status of environmental values, has been a core issue for environmental ethics since the field’s beginning in the 1970s. Nonanthropocentrists attribute value to non-human nature directly, while anthropocentrists claim that humans hold a certain priority. While the debate has produced a wide variety of interesting philosophical positions, it has not achieved its implicit goal of cultural reform. This is not because philosophers fail to agree on a tenable position, but because the debate is misconceived. Both sides of the debate assume that agreement on common values, worldviews, and substantive positions is prerequisite to cultural reform. Pragmatic criticism of this assumption, however, displays its underlying faults, while pragmatic inquiry into the field’s development displays how scholars are already generating methods more commensurate with the goal of cultural reform. Philosophers invested in changing public values should transition from debates in axiology (the study of values) to debating method, where axiology is just one method among others and not the one best suited to supporting cultural reform. A historical survey of the field suggests what scholars of environmental ethics are learning about methods that are both publicly engaged and culturally transformative.

Download Full-text

Eco-Philosophy dan Implikasinya dalam Politik Hukum Lingkungan di Indonesia

MELINTAS ◽

10.26593/mel.v30i1.1283.70-104 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 30 (1) ◽

pp. 70 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Eko Nurmardiansyah

Keyword(s):

Human Nature ◽

Environmental Ethics ◽

Environmental Law ◽

Human Behaviour ◽

Environmental Crisis ◽

The Government ◽

Political Praxis ◽

Policy Direction ◽

Goals And Objectives ◽

Philosophical Understanding

Environmental crisis is rooted in a fundamental mistake of philosophical understanding or worldview (weltanschauung) on human nature, nature, and human’s place in the overall ecosystem. The solution cannot be approached only technically and partialy, but instead, in a more comprehensive-holistic way by radically changing the perspective and the nature of human behaviour, which means, they are to be tuned in to the environmental ethics. Accordingly, human behaviour is to be conceived of and conducted in line with eco-philosophy. Its political praxis is to be implemented by way of politics of law (rechtspolitiek), politics of environmental law in particular. The politics of environmental law is the policy direction to be set by the government so as to achieve the goals and objectives in the protection and the management of the environment. This, in turn, can only be implemented if the constitution as well as the legislation is already ‘green’.

Download Full-text

Public Visions of the Human/Nature Relationship and their Implications for Environmental Ethics

Environmental Ethics ◽

10.5840/enviroethics20113314 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 33 (1) ◽

pp. 25-44 ◽

Cited By ~ 40

Author(s):

Mirjam de Groot ◽

Martin Drenthen ◽

Wouter T. de Groot ◽

Keyword(s):

Human Nature ◽

Environmental Ethics

Download Full-text

Pragmatism, Piety, and Environmental Ethics

Worldviews Global Religions Culture and Ecology ◽

10.1163/156853508x359976 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 12 (2-3) ◽

pp. 179-196 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Ben Minteer

Keyword(s):

Human Nature ◽

Religious Experience ◽

Environmental Ethics ◽

John Dewey ◽

Environmental Values ◽

The Political ◽

Classical Period ◽

Religious Thought ◽

Important Constraint ◽

Religious Dimensions

AbstractThe rise of pragmatism in environmental ethics in the 1990s was driven by several factors, including dissatisfaction with the field's dominant nonanthropocentrism and the desire to increase the political and policy influence of environmental ethics. Yet despite an emphasis on human experience as the foundation of environmental values and action, environmental pragmatists have paid little attention to the religious dimensions of human-nature interactions. In this paper I attempt to address this neglect by exploring the religious thought of John Dewey, arguably the most significant pragmatist philosopher of the classical period. I suggest that Dewey's understanding of religiosity—in particular, his concept of "natural piety"—instructs us to respect nonhuman nature as a source of human imaginative experience and self-unification. Although Dewey's naturalized approach to religious experience retains a broadly instrumentalist view toward nature, it is an instrumentality that supports a humble and appreciative attitude toward the environment and a sense of caution regarding the modification of nature for human purposes. I conclude by arguing that the recovery of Dewey's attitude of natural piety provides an important constraint on more aggressively anthropocentric approaches to human-nature relations, including those promoting sustainability as an alternative to traditional limits-based environmentalism.

Download Full-text

From Environmental Ethics to Environmental Action

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199941339.013.48 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Avner de Shalit

Keyword(s):

Human Nature ◽

Environmental Ethics ◽

Political Institutions ◽

Environmental Awareness ◽

Political Legitimacy ◽

Environmental Action ◽

Reasons For Action ◽

Political Consciousness ◽

Political Issue ◽

The Way

How should we move from environmental ethics—discussing reasons for action—to environmental action: doing and being engaged? Since the way a problem is defined constitutes the way it is solved, it is important to see whether we define the problem as one of environmental awareness—how people think about human-nature relationships—or as one of political consciousness: holding a belief that environmental matters constitute a political issue that should be treated not merely as a technological case but rather as a political one. Both options are possible, yet imply different modes of action. The former option (environmental awareness) implies radical changes in education, and the latter implies radical changes in our political institutions. Since radical changes (in mind or intuitional) need political legitimacy, many activists assume that democracy is an obstacle. It is argued that this is empirically false and confuses the problem with the solution.

Download Full-text