Introduction: beyond anthropocentrism, changing practices and the politics of 'nature' (A.Koensler & C. Papa) (original) (raw)

Ecology for Whom? Deep Ecology and the Death of Anthropocentrism

2000

Deep Ecology arises as a new perception to visualize the inexora- ble changes that humanity currently confronts. This new scientific- philosophical-religious approach claims for a new treatment for the Earth. However, this new eco-centered approach transcends the limit of any particular science of today, and claims that simple reforms are not sufficient. Deep Ecology calls for a reduction of human

AN ANSWER TO THE PROBLEM of ANTHROPOCENTRISM: DEEP ECOLOGY and ITS ETHICAL DIMENSIONS

ETHOS: Dialogues in Philosophy and Social Sciences, 2013

This study aims to introduce the Deep ecology movement and show how to apply it to our real-world experiences. The importance of Deep ecology comes from its being an answer to the problem of anthropocentrism. In this study, the necessity of reason in practicing ethical rules in our relation with nature is mentioned. Reason is needed to avoid anthropocentrism. In Deep ecology, although we are part of nature and what we do is natural-because of this reason care flows naturally-, our self-realization must be achieved in a proper way and this is possible only with reasoning. However, one should keep in mind that anthropocentrism is very tricky. Because reason and ethical rules can lead us to human-centeredness in a way. In order to get rid of this puzzle, one should combine these two in a smart formula.

Nature and Culture In Environmental Ethics

Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy, 1999

The pivotal claim in environmental ethics is that humans in their cultures are out of sustainable relationships to the natural environments comprising the landscapes on which these cultures are superimposed. But bringing such culture into more intelligent relationships with the natural world requires not so much "naturalizing culture" as discriminating recognition of the radical differences between nature and culture, on the basis of which a dialectical ethic of complementarity may be possible. How far nature can and ought be managed and be transformed into humanized nature, resulting in "the end of nature," is a provocative question. Environmental ethics ought also to seek nature as an end in itself.

The human-nature relationship The emergence of environmental ethics

Market capitalism has increased wealth beyond the imagination of previous generations, but cannot, in and of itself, distribute it equally or even equitably. These are problems that cannot be solved within the terms set by modernity, for the simple reason that they are not procedural, but rather valuational or, to use the simple word, moral. There is no way of bypassing difficult moral choices by way of a scientific decision-procedure that states "Maximize X". We first have to decide which X we wish to maximize, and how to weigh X against Y when the pursuit of one damages the fulfilment of the other. The human project is inescapably a moral project." Jonathan Sacks (in Dunning, 2003)

Normative Implications of Ecophenomenology. Towards a Deep Anthropo-Related Environmental Ethics

Environmental Values, 2024

Corporeality of human beings should be taken seriously and be included in their self-understanding as the ‘nature we are ourselves’. Such an ecophenomenological account has important normative implications. Firstly, I argue that the instrumental value of nature can be particularly well justified based on an ecophenomenological approach. Secondly, sentience is inseparable from corporeality. Therefore, insofar as it is a concern of the ecophenomenological approach to take corporeality and its implications seriously, sentient beings deserve direct moral consideration. Thirdly, it can strengthen the so-far underestimated category of eudaimonic values of nature, which can be best developed through an ecophenomenological reconstruction. Taken together, ecophenomenology is vital for environmental ethics and helps us to leave behind its widespread ‘centrism’. Ecophenomenology should therefore, both methodically and philosophically, be included into the discussion of environmental ethical problems.

Ecological Nature: A Non-Dualistic Concept for Rethinking Humankind's Place in the World

This paper puts forward a concept of naturalness as an alternative to the wilderness concept, which has been criticized for problematically situating human beings outside the natural world and thus conceptually foreclosing the possibility of humans living in harmony with nature. After examining and finding inadequate two concepts of naturalness dominant in the work of environmental ethicists, namely the natural as opposed to the supernatural and the natural as opposed to the anthropogenic, the paper delineates a concept of ecological naturalness, which links naturalness to ecological normality and ecosystem health. Tracing the historical roots of this concept back to classical Aristotelian philosophy, the paper shows that a contemporary ecological version of it actually underpins the intuitive views of many current-day environmentalists and ecologists. The paper concludes that the concept of ecological naturalness is better suited than the wilderness concept to support efforts at enabling humans to inhabit the earth’s ecosystems in ecologically sustainable ways.

POLITICAL ECOLOGIES: Nature, Humans and Non-Humans

2023

With our planet having entered a new geological epoch- “Anthropocene”- defined by the unprecedented material effects of human activity, human and non-human lives and futures are now deeply entangled, and endangered. The ensuing environmental crises have brought engagements with the non-human world to the center of public and political debates. As a discipline that explores various thresholds of difference, anthropology has long been concerned with the figure of the non-human (trees, totems, storms, animals) and the relation between human and non-human worlds. In this course, we consider what critical tools anthropology may offer for rethinking ethics and politics beyond the human. This includes the politics of marking distinctions between the human and the non-human, as well as engaging themes of access, equity and justice with an emphasis on colonialism, race and political economy. We will explore diverse ideas relating to the themes of nature, wilderness, natural resources, animalities, the environment and the state, and ecological justice in a cross-cultural and comparative perspective. Guided by ethnographic analysis, our studies will be in conversation with explorations of nature and the non-human in neighboring disciplines like philosophy, cultural studies, literature, psychology and feminist science and technology studies (STS). The course emphasizes the political dimension of engaging non-human worlds with an aim to historicize and pluralize environmental thought, within Europe and elsewhere. The first part of the course attends to how different epistemologies (ways of knowing) and cosmologies (world-making) produce concepts and methods for studying nature and the non-human world. The second part of the course examines how these different ways of knowing and thinking about the non-human world shape political and public debates about the environment. The course will emphasize making connections between theoretical ideas and debates and current issues. An individual research paper will provide an opportunity to apply insights from the course and make concrete and creative connections between academic theory and lived social reality. By focusing on the long disciplinary engagement with non-human worlds and entities in anthropology, we hope to better equip students to devise independent research projects on themes in environmental anthropology.

Anthropocentrism and Nature - An Attempt at Reconciliation

Due to the manifold ecological problems associated with exponentially growing human populations and their collective interactions with Earth’s various ecosystems, many environmentalists have lamented that nature is being destroyed by humanity. The theoretical framework which presumably accounts for our species’ destructiveness is pejoratively referred to as anthropocentrism, the view that humans are the sole bearers of intrinsic value on our planet, whereas all nonhuman aspects of the biosphere, whether biotic or abiotic, are of merely instrumental value to the satisfaction of human interests. I argue, however, that environmental thinkers’ critiques of anthropocentrism are ultimately misplaced. Humanity’s ecological predicament is not the result of overvaluing humanity as such but of permitting institutionalized forms of ethical egoism to underlie policies that narrowly focus on the short-term, frivolous interests of current individuals at the expense of the vital interests of future generations.

On the Meaning of Eudemonic Arguments for a Deep Anthropocentric Environmental Ethics

New German Critique, 2016

There are three broad categories of values in environmental ethics: instrumental, inherent moral, and eudemonistic. While instrumental values refer to ways humans are reliant on nature, inherent moral values give natural beings direct moral standing. Eudemonic values can pave the way to a “deep” anthropo-related approach. The article substantiates this claim in six steps. First, it criticizes the dichotomy between instrumental and inherent values. Second, eudemonic values are grounded in the phenomenological concept of experience. It is argued that experiences must be articulated through language. Third, eudemonic values are traced back to Goethean and Romantic traditions. Fourth, the scope of eudemonic values is opened. Fifth, the paradigm example of experiencing natural beauty is presented. Sixth, the gap between phenomenology, eudemonic values, and morals is addressed. In respect to morals, eudemonic values refer to Immanuel Kant's notion of “humanity within personhood.”