Rethinking Wilderness

Abstract
The “received” concept of wilderness as a place apart from and untouched by humans is five-times flawed: it is not universalizable, it is ethnocentric, it is ecologically naive, it separates humans from nature, and its referent is nonexistent. The received view of wilderness leads to dilemmas and unpalatable consequences, including the loss of designated wilderness areas by political and legislative authorities. What is needed is a more flexible notion of wilderness. Suggestions are made for a revised concept of wilderness
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,360
External links
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA
    Craig DeLancey (2012). An Ecological Concept of Wilderness. Ethics and the Environment 17 (1):25-44.
    Similar books and articles
    Greta Gaard (1997). Ecofeminism and Wilderness. Environmental Ethics 19 (1):5-24.
    Greta Gaard (1997). Ecofeminism and Wilderness. Environmental Ethics 19 (1):5-24.
    Karen Syse (2001). Ethics in the Woods. Ethics, Place and Environment 4 (3):226 – 234.
    John Hintz (2007). Some Political Problems for Rewilding Nature. Ethics, Place and Environment 10 (2):177 – 216.
    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2011-01-09

    Total downloads

    4 ( #198,579 of 1,088,810 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    2 ( #42,739 of 1,088,810 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.