Abstract
The character of the current controversy over geneticallymodified (GM) agriculture, typified by protesters' use of emotivesymbolism, has been largely inspired by the Green movement'snon-governmental organizations and political parties. This articleexplores the deeper philosophical and spiritual motivations of the Greenmovement, to inquire why it is implacably opposed to GM agriculture. TheGreen movement's anti-capitalism, exemplified by the hate-symbol statusof Monsanto as the company pioneering GM crops, is viewed within thewider context of alienation in the modern era. A complex of meanings isseen in Frankenstein as the focal symbol of GM protests, includingperceptions of risk, fears of the remixing of living identities seen ingenetic engineering, and resentment at the spiritual nihilism of thereduction of life to the digital code of DNA. By contrast, RobertGoodin's Green Theory of Value, which postulates the deep psychologicalimportance of nature in locating the self in a meaningful context largerthan ourselves, can explain the power of the Green symbol of thethreatened environment, Gaia. The advent of GM agriculture seems toimply that capitalism and technology can now enframe nature itself,leaving a world devoid of natural myth or meaning, with no escape fromthe alienation and nihilism of modernity. The central question posed forprotagonists of the GM debate is whether their agenda is based on thesepowerful but mythical conceptions of the environment, or whetherpreservation of the real environment is their primary ethic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Beck, U., “Risk Society and the Provident State,” in S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, and B. Wynne (eds), Risk, Environment and Modernity (Sage, London, 1996), pp. 27-43.
Becker, J., Hitler's Children: The Story of the Baader-Meinhof Gang (Granada, London, 1978).
Booth, A. L., “Does the Spirit Move You? Environmental Spirituality,” Environmental Values 8 (1999), 89-105.
Boulter, D., “Scientific and Public Perception of Plant Genetic Manipulation-A Critical Review,” Critical Reviews in Plant Science 16 (1997), 231-251.
Bratton, S. P., “Luc Ferry's Critique of Deep Ecology, Nazi Nature Protection Laws, and Environmental Anti-Semitism,” Ethics and the Environment 4 (1999), 3-22.
Butler, M., “Frankenstein and Radical Science,” Times Literary Supplement (4 April, 1993). Reprinted in J. P. Hunter (ed.), Mary Shelley, Frankenstein: Contexts, Nineteenth Century Responses, Modern Criticism (Norton, New York, 1996), pp. 302-313.
Carr, S. and L. Levidow, “Exploring the Links between Science, Risk, Uncertainty, and Ethics in Regulatory Controversies about Genetically-Modified Crops,” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 (2000), 29-39.
Coles, R., The Mind's Fate (Little Brown, Boston, 1995).
Drenthen, M., “The Paradox of Environmental Ethics: Nietzsche's View of Nature and the Wild,” Environmental Ethics 21 (1999), 163-175.
Dreyfus, H. L., “Heidegger on the Connection between Nihilism, Art, Technology, and Politics,” in C. B. Guignon (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993), pp. 289-316.
Feenberg, A., “Marcuse or Habermas: Two Critiques of Technology,” Inquiry 39 (1996), 45-70.
Frewer, L. J., “Public Perceptions of Genetically Modified Foods in Europe,” Journal of Commercial Biotechnology 6 (1999), 108-115.
Frewer L. J., D. Hedderley, C. Howard, and R. Shepherd, “'Objection' Mapping in Determining Group and Individual Concerns Regarding Genetic Engineering,” Agriculture and Human Values 14 (1997), 67-79.
Fogt, H., “The Greens and the New Left: Influences of Left-Extremism on Green Party Organisation and Policies,” in E. Kolinsky (ed.), The Greens in West Germany: Organisation and Policy Making (Berg, Oxford, 1989), pp. 89-121.
Gottlieb, R. S. (ed.), This Sacred Earth: Religion, Nature, Environment (Routledge, New York, 1996).
Habermas, J., “Martin Heidegger: on the Publication of the Lectures of 1935,” in R. Wolin (ed.), The Heidegger Controversy (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993), pp. 186-197.
Heidegger, M., “Only a God Can Save Us: Der Spiegel's Interview with Martin Heidegger on September 23, 1966,” trans. M. P. Alter and J. D. Caputo, Philosophy Today 20 (1976), 267-285. Reprinted in R. Wolin (ed.), The Heidegger Controversy (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993), pp. 91-116.
Heidegger, M., The Question Concerning Technology, trans. W. Lovitt (Harper and Row, New York, 1977).
Hollis, J., Tracking the Gods: The Place of Myth in Modern Life (Inner City Books, Toronto, 1995).
Jung, C. J., Symbols of Transformation, trans. R. F. C. Hull (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1956).
Kaiser, F. G., S. Wölfing, and U. Fuhrer, “Environmental Attitude and Ecological Behaviour,” Journal of Environmental Psychology 19 (1999), 1-19.
Kneen, B., “Restructuring Food for Profit: the Corporate Genetics of Cargill and Monsanto,” Agriculture and Human Values 16 (1999), 161-167.
Lash, S., B. Szerszynski, and B. Wynne (eds), Risk, Environment and Modernity (Sage, London, 1996).
Lipking, L., “Frankenstein, the True Story,” in J. P. Hunter (ed.), Mary Shelley, Frankenstein: Contexts, Nineteenth Century Responses, Modern Criticism (Norton, New York, 1996), pp. 313-331.
Marcuse, H., One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1964).
McKibben, B., The End of Nature (Viking, London, 1990).
McNeish, C., “Wild Land: the Refuge of the Spirit,” Birds: The Magazine of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (Spring 1999), 41.
Megill, A., Prophets of Extremity: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault, Derrida (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1985).
Merchant, C., Earthcare: Women and the Environment (Routledge, New York, 1996).
Milton, K., “Nature is Already Sacred,” Environmental Values 8 (1999), 437-449.
Nash, R. F., The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics (University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI, 1989).
Noll, R., The Jung Cult (HarperCollins, London, 1996).
Pois, R. A., National Socialism and the Religion of Nature (Croon Helm, London, 1986).
Porritt, J., Seeing Green: The Politics of Ecology Explained (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1984).
Reich, C. A., The Greening of America (Random House, New York, 1970).
Reiss, M. J. and R. Straughan, Improving Nature? The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).
Rifkin, J., Declaration of a Heretic (Routledge and Kegan Paul, Boston, 1985).
Sartre, J.-P., Being and Nothingness, trans. H. E. Barnes (Methuen, London, 1958).
Schultz, P. W. and L. Zelezny, “Values as Predictors of Environmental Attitudes: Evidence for Consistency across 14 Countries,” Journal of Environmental Psychology 19 (1999), 255-265.
Sessions, G., “The Deep Ecology Movement: a Review,” Environmental Review 11 (1987), 105-125.
Soper, K., What is Nature? (Blackwell, Oxford, 1995).
Stevens, J., Storming Heaven: LSD and the American Dream (Harper Collins, London, 1993).
Szerszynski, B., “On Knowing What to Do: Environmentalism and the Modern Problematic,” in S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, and B. Wynne (eds), Risk, Environment and Modernity (Sage, London, 1996), pp. 104-137.
Toney, J. C. and F. Forcella, “Exotic Plant Records in the Northwest United States 1950-1996: an Ecological Assessment,” Northwest Science 72 (1998), 198-213.
White, L., “The Historical Roots of our Ecologic Crisis,” Science 155 (1967), 1203-1207. Reprinted in R. S. Gottlieb (ed.), This Sacred Earth: Religion, Nature, Environment (Routledge, New York), pp. 184-193.
Whyte, W. H., The Organization Man (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1956).
Wolin, R., The Heidegger Controversy (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1993).
Zimmerman, M. E., “Rethinking the Heidegger-Deep Ecology Relationship,” Environmental Ethics 15 (1993), 195-224.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Scott, I.M. Green Symbolism in the Genetic Modification Debate. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13, 293–311 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009511616869
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009511616869