{"title":"环境实用主义与价值观的修正","authors":"Henrik Rydenfelt","doi":"10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.58.1.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Environmental pragmatism grew out of dissatisfaction with the inefficaciousness of environmental philosophy in influencing environmental decision-making and policy. Its most central proponent, Bryan G. Norton has provided an extended account of ecological management as a process of revision of the beliefs and values of a community through experience and deliberation. In this article, two lines of criticism of Norton’s view are examined. The first maintains that environmental pragmatism offers limited tools for dealing with major, global environmental crises such as climate change. According to the second, environmental pragmatism cannot provide a viable account of how social learning improves our values rather than that it merely changes them. It is argued that, while the first criticism largely misses its mark, the second points to an important issue that has broad relevance to pragmatist accounts of inquiry and democracy. Norton’s position—like that of many other pragmatists —oscillates between a constructivist and a realist approach to inquiry; it is only the latter approach, however, that can offer an account of the revision of values that can meet this criticism.","PeriodicalId":45325,"journal":{"name":"TRANSACTIONS OF THE CHARLES S PEIRCE SOCIETY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental Pragmatism and the Revision of Values\",\"authors\":\"Henrik Rydenfelt\",\"doi\":\"10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.58.1.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Environmental pragmatism grew out of dissatisfaction with the inefficaciousness of environmental philosophy in influencing environmental decision-making and policy. Its most central proponent, Bryan G. Norton has provided an extended account of ecological management as a process of revision of the beliefs and values of a community through experience and deliberation. In this article, two lines of criticism of Norton’s view are examined. The first maintains that environmental pragmatism offers limited tools for dealing with major, global environmental crises such as climate change. According to the second, environmental pragmatism cannot provide a viable account of how social learning improves our values rather than that it merely changes them. It is argued that, while the first criticism largely misses its mark, the second points to an important issue that has broad relevance to pragmatist accounts of inquiry and democracy. Norton’s position—like that of many other pragmatists —oscillates between a constructivist and a realist approach to inquiry; it is only the latter approach, however, that can offer an account of the revision of values that can meet this criticism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45325,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TRANSACTIONS OF THE CHARLES S PEIRCE SOCIETY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TRANSACTIONS OF THE CHARLES S PEIRCE SOCIETY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.58.1.04\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TRANSACTIONS OF THE CHARLES S PEIRCE SOCIETY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.58.1.04","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
摘要:环境实用主义源于对环境哲学在影响环境决策和政策方面的无效的不满。其最核心的支持者布莱恩·诺顿(Bryan G. Norton)将生态管理扩展为一个通过经验和深思熟虑对社区信仰和价值观进行修正的过程。在这篇文章中,对诺顿的观点进行了两种批评。第一种观点认为,环境实用主义在应对气候变化等重大全球环境危机方面提供的工具有限。根据第二种观点,环境实用主义不能提供一个可行的解释,说明社会学习如何改善我们的价值观,而不仅仅是改变它们。有人认为,虽然第一个批评在很大程度上没有击中要害,但第二个批评指出了一个重要问题,这个问题与实用主义者对调查和民主的描述有着广泛的相关性。诺顿的立场——就像许多其他实用主义者的立场一样——在建构主义和现实主义之间摇摆;然而,只有后一种方法才能对价值观的修正提供一种解释,以应对这种批评。
Environmental Pragmatism and the Revision of Values
Abstract:Environmental pragmatism grew out of dissatisfaction with the inefficaciousness of environmental philosophy in influencing environmental decision-making and policy. Its most central proponent, Bryan G. Norton has provided an extended account of ecological management as a process of revision of the beliefs and values of a community through experience and deliberation. In this article, two lines of criticism of Norton’s view are examined. The first maintains that environmental pragmatism offers limited tools for dealing with major, global environmental crises such as climate change. According to the second, environmental pragmatism cannot provide a viable account of how social learning improves our values rather than that it merely changes them. It is argued that, while the first criticism largely misses its mark, the second points to an important issue that has broad relevance to pragmatist accounts of inquiry and democracy. Norton’s position—like that of many other pragmatists —oscillates between a constructivist and a realist approach to inquiry; it is only the latter approach, however, that can offer an account of the revision of values that can meet this criticism.
期刊介绍:
Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society has been the premier peer-reviewed journal specializing in the history of American philosophy since its founding in 1965. Although named for the founder of American pragmatism, American philosophers of all schools and periods, from the colonial to the recent past, are extensively discussed. TCSPS regularly includes essays, and every significant book published in the field is discussed in a review essay. A subscription to the journal includes membership in the Charles S. Peirce Society, which was founded in 1946 by Frederic H. Young. The purpose of the Society is to encourage study of and communication about the work of Peirce and its ongoing influence in the many fields of intellectual endeavor to which he contributed.