David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Environmental Ethics 28 (2):165-183 (2006)
Any mediation of the humanity-nature divide driven by environmental concern must satisfactorily account for ecologically destructive human behavior. Holmes Rolston, III argues that human cultures should “follow nature” when interacting with nature. Yet he understands culture to necessarily degrade ecosystems, and allows that purely cultural values could legitimate the destruction of nature itself. Edward O. Wilson, meanwhile, argues that culture’s evolutionary function is to fit humanity to its niche; culture necessarily follows “epigenetic rules” naturally selected for this purpose. However, because humanity cannot but follow these rules, any human behavior—even (post)modern societies’ ecologically catastrophic behavior—is entirely natural. Therefore, Rolston’s reconciliation is too weak and Wilson’s too strong. Yet the two can be mutually modifying. Rolston’s “pure” culture should follow the natural value of human nature; yet, humans must be free to disobey (at their peril) Wilson’s epigenetic rules. Humanity thus becomesreconciled to nature by freely following its own nature, which is violated when the wider natural world is treated unnaturally
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Wayne Ouderkirk (1999). Can Nature Be Evil?: Rolston, Disvalue, and Theodicy. Environmental Ethics 21 (2):135-150.
Rolston (1979). Can and Ought We to Follow Nature? Environmental Ethics 1 (1):7-30.
Paul Veatch Moriarty (2007). Nature Naturalized: A Darwinian Defense of the Nature/Culture Distinction. Environmental Ethics 29 (3):227-246.
John Mizzoni (2002). Against Rolston's Defense of Eating Animals. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 16 (1):125-131.
Iii Holmes Rolston (1981). Values in Nature. Environmental Ethics 3 (2):113-128.
Thomas Heyd (2005). Nature, Culture, and Natural Heritage: Toward a Culture of Nature. Environmental Ethics 27 (4):339-354.
Rolston (1981). Values in Nature. Environmental Ethics 3 (2):113-128.
R. F. Ellen & Katsuyoshi Fukui (eds.) (1996). Redefining Nature: Ecology, Culture, and Domestication. Berg.
Alison Stone (2003). Irigaray and Hölderlin on the Relation Between Nature and Culture. Continental Philosophy Review 36 (4):415-432.
Iii Holmes Rolston (1979). Can and Ought We to Follow Nature? Environmental Ethics 1 (1):7-30.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #187,589 of 1,413,429 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #154,636 of 1,413,429 )
How can I increase my downloads?