The biophilia hypothesis and anthropocentric environmentalism

Environmental Ethics 25 (3):227-246 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Much anthropocentric environmental argument is limited by a narrow conception of how humans can benefit from nature. E. O. Wilson defends a more robust anthropocentric environmentalism based on a broader understanding of these benefits. At the center of his argument is the biophilia hypothesis according to which humans have an evolutionarily crafted, aesthetic and spiritual affinity for nature. However,the “biophilia hypothesis” covers a variety of claims, some modest and some more extreme. Insofar as we have significant evidence for biophilia, it favors modest versions which do not support a particularly robust anthropocentric environmental ethic. A significantly more robust environmental ethic requires the most extreme version of the biophilia hypothesis, for which there is the least evidence

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,346

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
54 (#220,186)

6 months
4 (#184,255)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

On Not Defining Sustainability.Jeffry L. Ramsey - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (6):1075-1087.
Defining Sustainability.Jeffry L. Ramsey - 2014 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (6):1049-1054.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references