约翰·维斯瓦德“哲学与人类生态学”导论

IF 0.8 4区 社会学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Human Ecology Review Pub Date : 2017-12-13 DOI:10.22459/HER.23.02.2017.14
W. Throop
{"title":"约翰·维斯瓦德“哲学与人类生态学”导论","authors":"W. Throop","doi":"10.22459/HER.23.02.2017.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although much has changed since 1986, when John Visvader’s paper was originally published, his guidance is still wise and necessary for today’s reader. It is still tempting to pigeon-hole human ecology as a particular kind of study with distinctive methods. After all, we tend to allocate funds and prestige to interdisciplinary fields once they have adopted a clear paradigm and some defining achievements that serve as exemplars for future research and that contain the norms and concepts defining the field. Conservation biology and sustainability science have come into their own in just such a fashion. Professor Visvader warned us against interpreting human ecology as having an essence—a defining set of characteristics. He argued that given the complexity of socioecological systems, we should expect to find many different ways of studying their dynamics, with some being largely descriptive and others being highly value-laden. Following Wittgenstein, he suggested that these approaches share a range of family resemblances in virtue of which they are all ways of conducting human ecology. It follows that human ecology is more open-ended and inclusive than many interdisciplinary studies, which is both a curse (for those who crave clarity and consistent standards) and a blessing (for those whose curiosity is stimulated by new connections).","PeriodicalId":46896,"journal":{"name":"Human Ecology Review","volume":"23 1","pages":"123"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction to John Visvader’s “Philosophy and Human Ecology”\",\"authors\":\"W. Throop\",\"doi\":\"10.22459/HER.23.02.2017.14\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although much has changed since 1986, when John Visvader’s paper was originally published, his guidance is still wise and necessary for today’s reader. It is still tempting to pigeon-hole human ecology as a particular kind of study with distinctive methods. After all, we tend to allocate funds and prestige to interdisciplinary fields once they have adopted a clear paradigm and some defining achievements that serve as exemplars for future research and that contain the norms and concepts defining the field. Conservation biology and sustainability science have come into their own in just such a fashion. Professor Visvader warned us against interpreting human ecology as having an essence—a defining set of characteristics. He argued that given the complexity of socioecological systems, we should expect to find many different ways of studying their dynamics, with some being largely descriptive and others being highly value-laden. Following Wittgenstein, he suggested that these approaches share a range of family resemblances in virtue of which they are all ways of conducting human ecology. It follows that human ecology is more open-ended and inclusive than many interdisciplinary studies, which is both a curse (for those who crave clarity and consistent standards) and a blessing (for those whose curiosity is stimulated by new connections).\",\"PeriodicalId\":46896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Ecology Review\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"123\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Ecology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22459/HER.23.02.2017.14\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Ecology Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22459/HER.23.02.2017.14","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管自1986年约翰·维斯瓦德的论文首次发表以来,情况发生了很大变化,但他的指导对今天的读者来说仍然是明智和必要的。将人类生态学作为一种独特的研究方法,仍然很有吸引力。毕竟,一旦跨学科领域采用了明确的范式和一些定义性成果,作为未来研究的典范,并包含了定义该领域的规范和概念,我们就会倾向于将资金和声望分配给这些领域。保护生物学和可持续发展科学正是以这样一种方式发展起来的。Visvader教授警告我们不要把人类生态学解释为具有本质——一组定义性的特征。他认为,鉴于社会生态系统的复杂性,我们应该找到许多不同的方法来研究它们的动态,其中一些主要是描述性的,另一些则具有高度的价值。继维特根斯坦之后,他提出这些方法具有一系列家族相似性,都是人类生态学的表现方式。因此,人类生态学比许多跨学科研究更开放、更包容,这既是诅咒(对于那些渴望清晰和一致标准的人),也是祝福(对于那些好奇心被新的联系激发的人)。
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
Introduction to John Visvader’s “Philosophy and Human Ecology”
Although much has changed since 1986, when John Visvader’s paper was originally published, his guidance is still wise and necessary for today’s reader. It is still tempting to pigeon-hole human ecology as a particular kind of study with distinctive methods. After all, we tend to allocate funds and prestige to interdisciplinary fields once they have adopted a clear paradigm and some defining achievements that serve as exemplars for future research and that contain the norms and concepts defining the field. Conservation biology and sustainability science have come into their own in just such a fashion. Professor Visvader warned us against interpreting human ecology as having an essence—a defining set of characteristics. He argued that given the complexity of socioecological systems, we should expect to find many different ways of studying their dynamics, with some being largely descriptive and others being highly value-laden. Following Wittgenstein, he suggested that these approaches share a range of family resemblances in virtue of which they are all ways of conducting human ecology. It follows that human ecology is more open-ended and inclusive than many interdisciplinary studies, which is both a curse (for those who crave clarity and consistent standards) and a blessing (for those whose curiosity is stimulated by new connections).
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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Human Ecology Review (ISSN 1074-4827) is a refereed journal published twice a year by the Society for Human Ecology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed research and theory on the interaction between humans and the environment and other links between culture and nature (Research in Human Ecology), essays and applications relevant to human ecology (Human Ecology Forum), book reviews (Contemporary Human Ecology), and relevant commentary, announcements, and awards (Human Ecology Bulletin).
期刊最新文献
Applicability of the Value–Belief–Norm Model to the Protection of Native Biodiversity in a District of Santiago, Chile Using Human Ecology and Feedback-Guided Analysis to Understand the Relationship Between Ecotourism and Poaching Association of Physical and Sociocultural Aspects of Adolescent Athletes with Sport Development: A Review Lyme Disease Risk Perceptions in New Hampshire, USA: Bridging Regression and Qualitative Comparative Analysis Influence of Socioeconomic Factors on the Knowledge of Medicinal Plants: A Case Study in the Truká Indigenous Population, Pernambuco, Brazil
×
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