“Faking nature” revisited
| Abstract | Robert Elliot's 1982 “Faking Nature,” represents one of the strongest philosophical rejections of the ground of restoration ecology ever offered.1 Here, and in a succession of papers defending the original essay, Elliot argued that ecological restoration, the practice of restoring damaged ecosystems, was akin to art forgery. Just as a copied art work could not reproduce the value of the original, restored nature could not reproduce the value of original nature, conceived as a form of nonanthropocentric and intrinsic, as opposed to merely instrumental, value.2 Eric Katz's 1992 “The Big Lie: Human Restoration of Nature,” extended this claim by further arguing that whatever was produced in a restored landscape it certainly could not count as having the original value of nature, particularly wild nature, and necessarily represented a form of disvalue and domination of nature.3 Elliot has continued to press his argument forward since the original publication of “Faking Nature,” augmenting and some would say softening his critique of restoration, in a book also called Faking Nature.4 Perhaps because both Elliot and Katz rest their claims on the defense of a strong nature-culture distinction, the two arguments are often lumped together as the Elliot-Katz rejection of the value of ecological restoration. Nonetheless, Elliot has made it clear in his recent book that his view is distinct from and even at odds with Katz’s views. In previous papers I have criticized Elliot and Katz’s work as an unhelpful philosophical contribution to the literature on restoration ecology. To my mind, restorationists are ultimately up to more good than harm, and whatever the.. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links | This entry has no external links. Add one. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesWilliam O.’Brien (2006). Exotic Invasions, Nativism, and Ecological Restoration: On the Persistence of a Contentious Debate. Ethics, Place and Environment 9 (1):63 – 77.
William O'Brien (2006). Exotic Invasions, Nativism, and Ecological Restoration: On the Persistence of a Contentious Debate. Ethics, Place and Environment 9 (1):63 – 77.
Sheila Lintott (2011). Preservation, Passivity, and Pessimism. Ethics and the Environment 16 (2):95-114.
Robert Elliot (1983). Ii. The Value of Wild Nature. Inquiry 26 (3):359 – 361.
Don Mannison (1983). Ii. Nature May Be of No Value: A Reply to Elliot. Inquiry 26 (2):233 – 235.
Steven Vogel (2003). The Nature of Artifacts. Environmental Ethics 25 (2):149-168.
Robert Elliot (1982). Faking Nature. Inquiry 25 (1):81 – 93.
Michael Vincent McGinnis (1996). Deep Ecology and the Foundations of Restoration. Inquiry 39 (2):203 – 217.
Glenn Deliège (2010). The Cinquefoil Controversy. Environmental Ethics 32 (1):17-32.
J. Thompson (2001). Faking Nature: The Ethics of Environmental Restoration. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (2):290 – 291.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
