浅层地质伦理与深层地质伦理:超越人类中心主义观点

Giovanni Frigo, Luiz Anselmo Ifanger, Roberto Greco, Helen Kopnina, Rafaela Hillerbrand
{"title":"浅层地质伦理与深层地质伦理:超越人类中心主义观点","authors":"Giovanni Frigo, Luiz Anselmo Ifanger, Roberto Greco, Helen Kopnina, Rafaela Hillerbrand","doi":"10.1007/s10806-023-09920-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>At its inception, geoethics was envisioned as a type of professional ethics concerned with the moral implications of geoscientific research, applications, and practices. More recently, however, some scholars have proposed versions of geoethics as public and global ethics. To better understand these developments, this article considers the relationship between geoethics and environmental ethics by exploring different aspects of the human-nature relation (i.e., the moral status and role of humans in relation to the non-human world). We start by noting that the main strains of geoethical thought elaborated so far represent examples of environmental virtue ethics and defend moral weak anthropocentric positions (e.g., “ethical”, “responsible” or “enlightened” anthropocentrism). Some scholars propose that such weak anthropocentric geoethics can synthesize the different positions in environmental ethics and move beyond them toward a novel and distinct approach. We compare the meaning and the use of the term “anthropocentrism” in both environmental ethics and geoethics, stressing that although geoethics is inevitably epistemically anthropocentric (i.e., anthropogenic), it does not need to be morally anthropocentric. We consider the compatibility of non-anthropocentric stances with current geoethical theory and argue for the integration of normative non-anthropocentric accounts (e.g., ecocentric) into geoethical debates and geoscience education.</p>","PeriodicalId":501152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shallow vs. Deep Geoethics: Moving Beyond Anthropocentric Views\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Frigo, Luiz Anselmo Ifanger, Roberto Greco, Helen Kopnina, Rafaela Hillerbrand\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10806-023-09920-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>At its inception, geoethics was envisioned as a type of professional ethics concerned with the moral implications of geoscientific research, applications, and practices. More recently, however, some scholars have proposed versions of geoethics as public and global ethics. To better understand these developments, this article considers the relationship between geoethics and environmental ethics by exploring different aspects of the human-nature relation (i.e., the moral status and role of humans in relation to the non-human world). We start by noting that the main strains of geoethical thought elaborated so far represent examples of environmental virtue ethics and defend moral weak anthropocentric positions (e.g., “ethical”, “responsible” or “enlightened” anthropocentrism). Some scholars propose that such weak anthropocentric geoethics can synthesize the different positions in environmental ethics and move beyond them toward a novel and distinct approach. We compare the meaning and the use of the term “anthropocentrism” in both environmental ethics and geoethics, stressing that although geoethics is inevitably epistemically anthropocentric (i.e., anthropogenic), it does not need to be morally anthropocentric. We consider the compatibility of non-anthropocentric stances with current geoethical theory and argue for the integration of normative non-anthropocentric accounts (e.g., ecocentric) into geoethical debates and geoscience education.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-023-09920-y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-023-09920-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

地质伦理学在诞生之初被设想为一种职业伦理学,关注地质科学研究、应用和实践的道德影响。但最近,一些学者提出了地质伦理学作为公共伦理学和全球伦理学的版本。为了更好地理解这些发展,本文通过探讨人与自然关系(即人类在非人类世界中的道德地位和作用)的不同方面,探讨了地质伦理学与环境伦理学之间的关系。我们首先要指出的是,迄今为止阐述的地球伦理学思想的主要流派代表了环境美德伦理学的范例,捍卫了道德上的弱人类中心主义立场(如 "伦理的"、"负责任的 "或 "开明的 "人类中心主义)。一些学者提出,这种弱人类中心主义地球伦理学可以综合环境伦理学中的不同立场,并超越这些立场,形成一种新颖独特的方法。我们比较了 "人类中心主义 "一词在环境伦理学和地球伦理学中的含义和用法,强调尽管地球伦理学在认识论上不可避免地具有人类中心主义(即人类活动),但在道德上并不需要具有人类中心主义。我们考虑了非人类中心主义立场与当前地球伦理学理论的兼容性,并主张将规范性的非人类中心主义观点(如生态中心主义)纳入地球伦理学辩论和地球科学教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Shallow vs. Deep Geoethics: Moving Beyond Anthropocentric Views

At its inception, geoethics was envisioned as a type of professional ethics concerned with the moral implications of geoscientific research, applications, and practices. More recently, however, some scholars have proposed versions of geoethics as public and global ethics. To better understand these developments, this article considers the relationship between geoethics and environmental ethics by exploring different aspects of the human-nature relation (i.e., the moral status and role of humans in relation to the non-human world). We start by noting that the main strains of geoethical thought elaborated so far represent examples of environmental virtue ethics and defend moral weak anthropocentric positions (e.g., “ethical”, “responsible” or “enlightened” anthropocentrism). Some scholars propose that such weak anthropocentric geoethics can synthesize the different positions in environmental ethics and move beyond them toward a novel and distinct approach. We compare the meaning and the use of the term “anthropocentrism” in both environmental ethics and geoethics, stressing that although geoethics is inevitably epistemically anthropocentric (i.e., anthropogenic), it does not need to be morally anthropocentric. We consider the compatibility of non-anthropocentric stances with current geoethical theory and argue for the integration of normative non-anthropocentric accounts (e.g., ecocentric) into geoethical debates and geoscience education.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Three Injustices of Adaptation Finance - A Relational Egalitarian Analysis Interspecies Justice within a Normative Sustainable Development Framework–Animal-Friendly Energy Systems as a Test Case Value-Able Valuers: Anthropogenic Climate Change and Expanding Community to the “Radically Other” When Cows Become Heroes: The Construction of Animal Subjectivity and Environmental Sustainability in the Swedish Organic food Sector Correction: Farming non-typical sentient species: ethical framework requires passing a high bar
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1