{"title":"European conservatism and the study of nature: From sacralization of nature to nihilism","authors":"Philipp Tagirov","doi":"10.22363/2313-2272-2022-22-4-764-781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The issue of how we understand nature and operate with it goes beyond the scope of ecology or economics and directly affects the ontological-anthropological foundations of culture. The subject-object model that dominates today claims universal validity, but many thinkers challenge its universality. Representatives of the European continental conservative thought of the 20th - early 21st centuries focus on the already accepted forms of natural knowledge and nature relations, which do not imply the objectification of nature or its reduction to an economic resource. These cultural forms belong to the historical past, which raises the question of the possible return to them by the contemporary man or of their possible return to his life. The article starts with the analysis of the nature-knowledge that dominated, according to the mentioned conservative thinkers, before the modern ‘objectification’ of nature. The author considers two related but non-identical approaches to the ‘traditional’ understanding of nature developed by these thinkers. The first approach claims the ‘sanctification of nature’, i.e., the natural world is not objectified but understood as a single reality that includes the man and has a sacred status. The second approach is represented by the metaphysically oriented conservatists and considers the natural world primarily through its function of symbolizing the transcendent supernatural world. Then the author considers the conservative thinkers’ views on the ‘nihilism’ of the last centuries, which led to the current subjectobject relationship with nature, and focuses on their perception of the Christian understanding of nature. The article concludes with the hypothesis that the recognition of each culture’s ‘right to its own nature’ (the essence of the contemporary cultural pluralism) can help to overcome the universalization of a specific understanding of nature by choosing a different model known to this culture in past epochs.","PeriodicalId":42659,"journal":{"name":"RUDN Journal of Sociology-Vestnik Rossiiskogo Universiteta Druzhby Narodov Seriya Sotsiologiya","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUDN Journal of Sociology-Vestnik Rossiiskogo Universiteta Druzhby Narodov Seriya Sotsiologiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2272-2022-22-4-764-781","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The issue of how we understand nature and operate with it goes beyond the scope of ecology or economics and directly affects the ontological-anthropological foundations of culture. The subject-object model that dominates today claims universal validity, but many thinkers challenge its universality. Representatives of the European continental conservative thought of the 20th - early 21st centuries focus on the already accepted forms of natural knowledge and nature relations, which do not imply the objectification of nature or its reduction to an economic resource. These cultural forms belong to the historical past, which raises the question of the possible return to them by the contemporary man or of their possible return to his life. The article starts with the analysis of the nature-knowledge that dominated, according to the mentioned conservative thinkers, before the modern ‘objectification’ of nature. The author considers two related but non-identical approaches to the ‘traditional’ understanding of nature developed by these thinkers. The first approach claims the ‘sanctification of nature’, i.e., the natural world is not objectified but understood as a single reality that includes the man and has a sacred status. The second approach is represented by the metaphysically oriented conservatists and considers the natural world primarily through its function of symbolizing the transcendent supernatural world. Then the author considers the conservative thinkers’ views on the ‘nihilism’ of the last centuries, which led to the current subjectobject relationship with nature, and focuses on their perception of the Christian understanding of nature. The article concludes with the hypothesis that the recognition of each culture’s ‘right to its own nature’ (the essence of the contemporary cultural pluralism) can help to overcome the universalization of a specific understanding of nature by choosing a different model known to this culture in past epochs.
期刊介绍:
The mission of the Journal is a broad exchange of scientific information, and of the results of theoretical and empirical studies of the researchers from different fields of sociology: history of sociology, sociology of management, political sociology, economic sociology, sociology of culture, etc., philosophy, political science, demography – both in Russia and abroad. The articles of the Journal are grouped under ‘floating’ rubrics (chosen specially to structure the main themes of each issue), with the following rubrics as basic: Theory, Methodology and History of Sociological Research Contemporary Society: The Urgent Issues and Prospects for Development Surveys, Experiments, Case Studies Sociology of Organizations Sociology of Management Sociological Lectures. The titles of the rubrics are generally broadly formulated so that, despite the obvious theoretical focus of most articles (this is the principal distinguishing feature of the Series forming the image of the scientific journal), in each section we can publish articles differing substantially in their area of study and subject matter, conceptual focus, methodological tools of empirical research, the country of origin and disciplinary affiliation.