David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4):293-311 (2000)
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.
|Keywords||Frankenstein Gaia genetic modification Goodin Green movement Heidegger Jung Marcuse Monsanto Nietzsche Sartre|
|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
Daniel Gregorowius, Petra Lindemann-Matthies & Markus Huppenbauer (2012). Ethical Discourse on the Use of Genetically Modified Crops: A Review of Academic Publications in the Fields of Ecology and Environmental Ethics. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):265-293.
Similar books and articles
Brian Doherty & Marius de Geus (eds.) (1996). Democracy and Green Political Thought: Sustainability, Rights, and Citizenship. Routledge.
Andrew Dobson & Paul Lucardie (eds.) (1993). The Politics of Nature: Explorations in Green Political Theory. Routledge.
Deane Curtin (1995). Making Peace with the Earth: Indigenous Agriculture and the Green Revolution. Environmental Ethics 17 (1):59-73.
Stephen Rainbow (1993). Green Politics. Oxford University Press.
Felix Dodds (ed.) (1988). Into the Twenty-First Century: An Agenda for Political Re-Alignment. Green Print.
Yu-Shan Chen (2010). The Drivers of Green Brand Equity: Green Brand Image, Green Satisfaction, and Green Trust. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 93 (2):307 - 319.
John Rensenbrink (1999). Against All Odds: The Green Transformation of American Politics. Leopold Press.
Peggy J. Parks (2012). The Green Movement. Referencepoint Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #203,584 of 1,413,158 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #153,719 of 1,413,158 )
How can I increase my downloads?