Correspondence To

7/29/2019 Correspondence To

1/15

* Correspondence to: Prof. Dr. Hab. Wodzimierz Tyburski, Institute of Philosophy, Nicolaus Copernicus University, FosaStaromiejska 1a, 87-100Torun, Poland. E-mail: [email protected] DevelopmentSust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)Published online 12 November 2007 in Wiley InterScience(www.interscience.wiley.com)DOI: 10.1002/sd.342

Origin and Development of EcologicalPhilosophy and Environmental Ethics andTheirImpact on the Idea of SustainableDevelopmentWodzimierz Tyburski*Wodzimierz Tyburski, Institute of Philosophy, Nicolaus Copernicus University,

PolandABSTRACTA critical review of environmental philosophy and environmental ethics is discussedin relation to the idea of sustainable development. The article makes reference to 19thcentury infl uences that inspired thought orientated towards protecting the naturalenvironment, and then presents the stages of the development of ecological philosophy,the main standpoints and their representatives. The main features of Polisheco-philosophical thought are presented together with an outline of the most signifi -cant achievements of these disciplines on a global scale. The infl uence ofenvironmentalphilosophy and ethics on social aspects of sustainable development is also

presented. Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.Received 5 Febuary 2007; revised 7 May 2007; accepted 22 June 2007Keywords: ecological philosophy; environmental ethics; anthropocentrism; biocentrism; holism; sustainabledevelopment

Introduction

THE CONTINUING DESTRUCTION OF THE WORLD OF NATURE AND THE ECOLOGICAL CRISISCOMPEL

US to intensify and integrate the organizational efforts of whole communities and search for

various ways to halt adverse processes. We need varied technical and technological actions, anactive effort in many scientifi c fi elds (natural sciences, economics and law) and on the part oforganizers of social life, people representing different spheres and interests but united by acommonidea, the struggle to halt the damage to the human natural environment. These disciplinespossess alarge number of possibilities to raise consciousness, creating attitudes, justifi cations andmotivations.


2/15

This fi eld of activity includes environmental protection, also defi ned as ecological humanism.An integralcomponent is philosophicalethical thought together with other disciplines of the humanities:ecopedagogy,eco-psychology, eco-aesthetics or eco-theology. They complement the natural sciences,economics

and law, with a range of new components, including philosophical, axiological and educationaldimensions. Therefore, for example, on the one hand, ecological philosophy strives to show thecollectionof philosophical, cultural and world-view conditions that in the modern era have generatedradicallyutilitarian positivisttechnocratic thought and whose practical consequences have proved to behighlyCopyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Ecological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development 101Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

dangerous for the natural world. On the other hand, it makes its own signifi cant contribution tothe work of building new thought about humans and the natural world, aiming to project a vision

ofthe future and to build a model of civilization orientated towards ecological needs. This is bestseen inthe unquestionable contribution of ecological philosophy to the construction of the foundationsof theidea fi rst of eco-development and now of sustainable development. In turn, ethical refl ectionpresentsand justifi es the desirable hierarchy of values and enriches inordinately all attempts to answerthe fundamentalquestions: how should people behave towards their natural environment and why should theyact in this way? With this aim it wishes to develop an axiological model of preferences in therelations

between humans and nature, in order that moral values should represent an important criterionregulatingthese relations. They should also temper potential confl icts between human activities andnatureand enable such choices to be made that would favour the preservation of ecological balance insituationswhere humans intervene in the world of nature, adapting it for their needs.There is no doubt that the situation in which the modern world and civilization have foundthemselvesrepresents a great challenge for philosophy and ethics. There is the need to refer theoretically toglobal processes, phenomena and tendencies, to reveal their mechanisms and also to engageactively in

the stream of practical actions. The consciousness of the need to protect the nature is confirmed byphilosophicalethical refl ection by the effects of its results. Both ecological philosophy andenvironmentalethics have clearly defi ned the object of their research interests and have already achieved ahigh levelof methodological self-awareness. They are also contributing signifi cantly to the theory andpractice ofecological education as well as to specifi c actions in the sphere of protecting the natural world.


3/15

International PerspectiveEcological philosophy and environmental ethics, together with their object of interest, wereestablishedin a reasonably mature form in the 1960s and 1970s, mainly in the United States. Since thentheir rapidand dynamic development has been visible. In order to reach the earliest sources and the

emergence ofecological thought, we need to go back to the second half of the 19th century, when such atrend appearedin American literature, gaining a relatively high degree of resonance. It found followers amongrepresentativesof New England transcendentalism a literaryphilosophical movement with a diverseideologicalprovenance, in which the most important positions were held by such thinkers as Ralph WaldoEmerson, Henry David Thoreau, Theodore Parker and Margaret Fuller. Their works give voiceto theidea of respect for nature, which especially in the works of Emerson and Thoreau stands outso

distinctly that they remained in public consciousness not only for their contemporaries greatapologistsfor and lovers of nature.Emerson (Gromczynski, 1992) openly criticized the purely utilitarian treatment of nature. Hisphilosophyproclaimed the idea of harmonious accord and interdependence of the natural and humanworlds. The philosopher was convinced that nature could become a kind of teacher for people,sincethey can perceive its internal order and harmony.Without opposing peoples technical intervention in the world of nature, Emerson believes that itisof much greater value when we forego the attitude of dominance and experience a fusion with

natureand become conscious of our kinship and substantial identifi cation with everything thatsurrounds us.This aim is unattainable for those who limit themselves to narrowly utilitarian actions and what iscalledscientifi c reason. What is needed is a change in looking at ourselves and at what surrounds us,embracingwith a new look our existence in its substantial unity with the world. It is Emersons belief that language is of particular importance in revealing the true nature ofexistence.It owes its peculiar properties to its various dimensions. Language only fulfi ls this kind of role102 W. Tyburski

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

when we discover its deepest meanings, which are based on expressing the primary text ofnature,forgotten in everyday life. By discovering the primary text of nature we can begin an authenticdialoguewith it.This skill of communing with nature and conducting his own interpretation of dialogue with it was


4/15

mastered by H. D. Thoreau, author of the famous and excellent essays collected under the titleWalden,or Life in the Woods. In these essays he expressed his love for wild nature, declaring like themajorityof people I am drawn to both the sublime and the sphere of the primitive and the wild, but Irespect

them both equally. I love wildness no less than goodness and he added goodness is the onlyinvestmentthat never disappoints (Thoreau, 1854). His literary output, full of admiration for nature, wasalso akind of manifesto declared in defence of wild nature. Thoreaus book and Emersonsphilosophicalthought became the source of inspiration for the world view of many creators and thinkersfascinatedby this idea: Chekhov, Tolstoy, Gandhi; and above all it formed the American mentality. Amongothersto fi nd themselves under the spell of these ideas was John Muir, an eminent activist in the fi eldof

environmental protection, particularly regarding areas of wilderness in the United States. Hewas theprecursor of the idea of the protection of wild nature and a eulogist for wilderness, who called fortheseareas to be left untouched by human activity and declared the superiority of wild animals overdomesticones. He thus initiated, on a practical level, the position in the matter of environmentalprotection thatis defi ned as preservation, whose supporters strive to preserve the environment and to leave itin a statechanged as little as possible, then formulating an additional postulate the protection of nature,particularly

wild nature, for its own sake.These ideas also touched the style of Aldo Leopold, considered to be the father of ecologicalphilosophyand environmental ethics in its various versions. It is he who has most expressively presentedthemain principle of the idea of preservation. It dismisses the belief in the purely ancillary role ofnaturetowards humankind and does not accept utilitarianism because it confers value on nature onlyto thedegree to which it is a requisite of human prosperity and benefi t. Instead he expressed the viewthat theinterests of non-human beings should be taken into consideration for their own sake and not

only whenthey serve human aims and needs. Nature should be considered as an ethical good to whichhumansshould show commitment. He emphasized that nature as a whole, and not selected wild areasas Muirpostulated, had a value in its own right and had the right to exist and to last in the form mostappropriatefor it. The duty of humans is to respect this fact. This is why in his well known bookA SandCounty


5/15

Almanac(Leopold, 1948) he presents the proposition of the so-called land ethic. This ethicwidens theborders of the biotic community. He proposes a new way of thinking, which from the start posesthequestion not only as to what is profi table from the economic point of view, but also what isethically and

aesthetically right. The correct answer to this, Leopold claims, is based on the conviction thatwhat isright is what benefi ts the preservation of the coherence, stability and beauty of the bioticcommunity.What is not right, on the other hand, is what is not benefi cial for this. Leopold criticizes thesystem ofnature protection based exclusively on economic benefi ts while ignoring many elements of theearthscommunity that have no utilitarian values but are indispensable for it to function healthily. Hereethicsplays an unusually far-reaching role, connected with the obligation of protecting all componentparts of

the biotic community.Leopolds thoughts from his bookA Sand County Almanacplayed an inspirational role inestablishingthis style of thinking, which generated the new disciplines of refl ection of ecological philosophyandenvironmental ethics. With some justifi cation, then, Leopold is widely recognized as theprecursor ofthese disciplines. The ideas of the amateur philosopher and forester had enthusiastic followersbut werealso the subject of criticism on the part of those who practised philosophy professionally andindicatedthe lack of theoretical justifi cation and found inconsistencies in his thinking, especially the

committingof the naturalistic error. Leopolds heir and continuator, the academic philosopher J. BairdCallicottEcological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development 103Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

(1989), creatively developed the thinking of the author of the land ethic, and thanks to hisprofessionalpreparation was able to avoid the mistakes and transgressions of which his predecessor wasaccused.Callicott provided the philosophical bases for the holistically orientated ecological philosophy.Hisunquestionable achievement is the creative development of the idea of the ethic ofcommunities, itstheoretical justifi cation and also the construction of a new way of thinking called the ecocentricparadigm.For this philosopher, holistic ethics is not only connected with certain obligations towards Earth,but also requires sacrifi ces for its good, analogously as we take obligations upon ourselveswhich areoften bound up with renouncement towards our family, friends and country.Callicotts views became the direct inspiration for the creative activity of one of the most eminent


6/15

representatives of holistic ecological philosophy, Holmes Rolston III, a person of great merit intheglobal ecological movement (Rolston, 1989). He strived to construct a naturalistic concept ofenvironmentalethics, while he based the relations of humans and nature by evoking the category ofresponsibility.

He devoted much space in his considerations to the issue of values, including an analysis of theweighty and diffi cult subject of the transition from values to facts and the search for a way toavoid thenaturalistic error. He indicated the link between facts and values, but at the same time, inaccordancewith traditional ethics, he emphasized that such a transition is basically impossible from thepoint ofview of formal logic. He developed the idea of holistic philosophy with the primacy of the good ofwholeecosystems over individual good. He evoked the principles and rules that should be followed bypoliticswith regard to the natural environment, taken on the local and global scale; he analysed

business relations,especially business ethics with regard to the natural environment. In this context, he spoke onmany signifi cant issues included in considerations on sustainable development.Rolstons considerations are representative of environmental philosophy and ethics in theirholisticversion (Rolston, 1989). These disciplines focus on whole ecosystems and in practicalpostulates to placethe good of the whole above the good of individual beings. This fact differentiates Rolstonsviews fromthe biocentrically orientated environmental ethics of Paul W. Taylor, which is simultaneouslyindividualisticethics. In this, the way of looking at the problem of the environment through the prism of the

good of individual beings is predominant. Taylors concept, called respect for nature (Taylor,1986), isone of the best known versions of environmental ethics. The attitude of respect for natureshould resultfrom the conviction that every organism, population and community of living beings possessesgood(welfare) and intrinsic value, which means that we can think of them as deserving moraltreatment andcommitment. According to the creator of the respect for nature ethic, as long as we consider anorganism,population or group of organisms as entities with innate value, we believe that they can neverbe

treated as objects or things whose whole value depends on fulfi lling an instrumental functionsimplybecause they are members of the earths living community. For this reason, achieving theirgood issomething intrinsically valuable. Thus, if we say that an entity has an innate value, then thatmeans thatits good deserves to be the object of refl ection of moral subjects, and also that the achievementof itsgood has an intrinsic value of itself, because of it.


7/15

On the other hand, the anthropocentric version of the environmental protection ethic, whosebestknown representative is John Passmore, rejects the moral status of non-human beings andthereby thewidening of the scope of morality (Passmore, 1980). It sees no need to construct any new ethicsand

believes that it is possible to solve environmental problems caused by civilization within theframeworkof the existing tradition. The duties formulated on the basis of anthropocentrically orientatedenvironmentalethics have moral character only because of their fi nal receiver, so humankind. Within this wayof thinking, these duties and actions lose their moral character when their only and directaddressee isthe environment. We can say, therefore, according to the concept maintained in the spirit ofanthropocentrism,that human actions regarding the natural environment and its non-human inhabitants areactually dependent on whether they fulfi l two criteria, namely (a) whether their consequencesare

104 W. TyburskiCopyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

benefi cial (or detrimental) for human prosperity and (b) whether they comply (or do not comply)withthe system of norms that protect human rights. Thus we can have obligations that concern thenaturalecosystems and biocentric communities of our planet, but these obligations are always basedon the factthat how we treat these ecosystems and living communities can only affect the realization ofhumanvalues and rights.

Another, and one of the most popular trends in current environmental thought, is deep ecology,whosename stresses the fact that in its postulates it decidedly exceeds the way of thinkingcharacteristic ofshallow ecology. The creator of deep ecology, the eminent Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess,reasonsthat the essence of ecological thinking is the posing of deep questions about what society, whatsystemof education, what religions are most benefi cial for life on this planet as a whole, and he addsthat socialand humanist knowledge cannot diverge from the answers to these questions (Seed et al.,1988). Deepecology expresses a decided criticism of the positivisttechnocratic model of the development ofcivilization,aggressive market economics and the consumer lifestyle. It proposes new ecological thinking,theconcept of green politics aimed at protecting and defending the wealth and variety of forms oflife andin the sphere of economics green economics responsible for action on behalf of economicallyself-sufficient bioregions and lifestyles motivated by postulates of restrained consumerism.


8/15

Deep ecology, speaking in the name of and on behalf of all forms of life, seeks a better form fortherelations between people and other living beings inhabiting Earth. Its supporters contend that itis amisconception of the human race that we identify all values with human values. Therefore, theybelieve

that raw materials and other natural goods are not only for people, but also for all living beings.Inscientifi c study they place a broad defi nition of science and holistic thought before a narrowdefi nitionand analytical thought. They demand deep and radical change in the consciousness of society.

At thebasis of this change should be the conviction that forms of life do not form pyramids with ourspeciesat the summit, but rather a circle in which everything is linked with everything.

Among other philosophers we will mention A. Attfi eld, W. S. Clark, W. K Franken, E. Goldsmith,E.C. Hargrove, J. Lovelock, M. Midgley, R. Nash, T. Regan, B. Rollin, J. Sweed and others.

Polish PerspectiveIn Poland ecological philosophy and environmental ethics became the object of serious interestandstudies at the end of the 1980s. One of the fi rst papers was On the Idea of EcologicalHumanism(Tyburski, 1990). The majority of these publications referred directly to the views of theaforementionedrepresentatives of eco-philosophical thought, developing them creatively, indicating their ownstandpointsand ways of thinking. In 1992, Marek M. Bonenbergs book Environmental Ethics: Assumptionsand Directions was published (Bonenberg, 1992), which was the fi rst very competentpresentation of the

main standpoints in environmental ethics in Polish literature. The author, referring to the vastliterature,analyses the concepts of Tom Regan, extending moral rights to non-human beings, theindividualisticethics of Robin Attfi eld, the ethic of respect for nature by Paul W. Taylor, the land ethic by AldoLeopoldand J. Baird Callicott, deep ecology, the ecocentric theory of Holmes Rolston III, the ethicalimplicationsof the Gaia hypothesis, Edward Goldsmiths biosphere ethics and eco -ethics by HenrykSkolimowski.In 1993, the next publication devoted to the problem of environmental ethics was published, abook

by the present author entitled Unite with the Earth. Around the Issues of Ecological Humanism(Tyburski,1993). Alongside a presentation of the main standpoints in environmental ethics, the authorfocusesabove all on highlighting and analysing the axiological, deontological and educational dimensionofthe new discipline. He presents a system of values elaborated on its basis (eco-values), a set ofnormsEcological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development 105


9/15

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

and principles of behaviour and a programme of ecological education as seen from theperspective ofenvironmental ethics.

An important event, that had repercussions on the further development of environmental ethics

andecological philosophy, was the Sixth Convention of Polish Philosophy in Torun, in 1995. For thefi rst time,a section was created devoted to the issues of environmental ethics, eco-philosophy andbioethics. Theresult of the very fruitful deliberations was the publication Eco-Philosophy and Bioethics(Tyburski, 1996a),

which included papers by Z. Pia/tek, W. Tyburski, J. M. Dol e/ga, Z. Hull, A. Papuzinski andothers.The issues dealt with in the aforementioned publication were drawn on in a further collectivework,the fruit of a symposium in which researchers interested in the connections between ecology,

economicsand ethics presented the results of their investigations. This fact is highlighted by the title of thework: EconomicsEcologyEthics (Tyburski, 1996b). The directions of the considerationspresented in itprovide a catalogue of far-reaching questions. How should people behave towards their naturalsurroundingsand why should they behave thus? How far is economic rationality compatible with ecologicalrationality? In which direction should the economic transformation go in order that the effects ofactionsserving economic purposes should not cause negative ecological consequences? Whatcatalogue of valuescan link ecological and economic policies? What elements form the contemporary ideology of

environmentalprotection?The problem of ecological philosophy is the object of interest of Konrad Waloszczyk. Hisdissertationentitled The Ecological Crisis in the Light of Eco-Philosophy(Waloszczyk, 1996) deservesparticularattention.

In 1998, two important works were published devoted to environmental ethics. Zdzisl awaPia/tek isthe author of a very interesting dissertation entitled Environmental Ethics. A New Look at thePlace ofHumans in Nature (Pia/tek, 1998). In line with its title, it proposes a new look at non-humanliving beingsthat make up the Earths biosphere, taking a biocentric point of view and arguing for therecognition ofthe following points: not only humans, but also non-human living beings, have an intrinsic value; not only humans, but also non-human living beings, realize their characteristic vital values andknowhow to live in accordance with their own nature;


10/15

not only humans, but also every living being, is a measure of those aspects of the environmentwithwhich it must cooperate in order to live. The biosphere should not be exploited and managedonlyfrom the point of view of human interests.The same year a collective work entitled Environmental Ethics. Theoretical and Practical

Implications(Tyburski, 1998) was published, presenting the results of the fi rst national conference devotedto variousaspects of environmental ethics. The conference gathered nearly all the researchersspecializing in thisdiscipline, who, despite theoretical and methodological differences, had the common convictionthatwhat is happening at the meeting point of ethics and ecology is very signifi cant, and that theworld ofhuman relations with nature has a deep axiological dimension which requires theoretical reflection andpractical action.

The works of Andrzej Papuzinski also deserve attention. He proposed the interesting conceptof culturistecological philosophy, which found its full expression in the book Life-Science-Ecology.Introductionto Culturist Ecological Philosophy(Papuzinski, 1998). By highlighting the social role ofphilosophy, culturistecological philosophy transforms the problem of the natural environment into knowledge abouttheecological diffi culties of contemporary culture; assimilation of this knowledge by society maytransformthe existing world.Different aspects of ecological ethics and philosophy have, for many years, been discussed and

analysedby Zbigniew Hull; he pays particular attention to the philosophical foundations of sustainable106 W. TyburskiCopyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

development (Hull, 1995). The fullest expression and analysis of the ecological problem,however, is to

be found in the works of Jzef M. Dol e/ga (1998).It is also worth noting that there have been attempts to construct an environmental ethic fromthe

position of Christian thought. An example is the work by the priest Julisl aw L ukomski entitledAn

Attempt to Construct a Christian Ethic of the Natural Environment(L ukomski, 1999). Selectedissues inenvironmental ethics are analysed from the same position by the priests Tadeusz Slipko and

AndrzejZwolinski in the book entitled The Crossroads of Ecology(Slipko and Zwolinski, 1999).Jan Wawrzyniak analyses the problems of environmental ethics from another, naturalisticposition,


11/15

in a vast dissertation, Theoretical Foundations of Naturalistic Environmental Ethics(Wawrzyniak, 2000),including a very lively, controversial discussion on the relations between humans and natureand whathe calls a new look at the place and duties of humans in the world of nature. In turn, theproblem of

environmentalism is popularized by Wiesl aw Sztumski, while Andrzej Kiepas examinesvarious aspectsof the ecological problem from the perspective of technical philosophy.

Artur Pawl owski speaks on the subject of humans responsibility for nature, referring to HansJonassconcept of responsibility, James Lovelocks Gaia concept and Arne Naesss concept of deepecology.

Pawl owski is also the editor of two volumes of dissertations on the subject of philosophicaland social

conditions for sustainable development (Pawl owski 1999, 2003, 2004).A publication entirely devoted to environmental ethics and the popularization of its ideas is acollectivework entitled Environmental Ethics as a Challenge for the 21st Century(Czartoszewski, 2002)theresult of a conference organized by the Centre of Human Ecology and Bioethics at CardinalStefanWyszynski University in Warsaw.

A survey of the main standpoints in eco-ethics is provided by Ignacy S. Fiut in a book presentingthedirections of environmentally friendly contemporary axiology (Fiut, 1999). In turn, a survey andanalysisof the basic catalogue of the subjects of eco-philosophy are presented in the latest book by

StefanKonstanczak, mainly devoted to the needs of academic didactics, while philosophical premisesfound atthe basis of the concept of sustainable development are analysed by Leszek Gawor.It should also be mentioned that in 1999 a collective work, that was also the fi rst academictextbookfrom the fi eld of ecological philosophy, was published under the title An Introduction to thePhilosophicalProblems of Ecology(Papuzinski, 1999). The degree of advancement of research on eco-philosophicalproblems led to a fi rst attempt to sum up the achievements so far. Five authors undertook thistask: K.

L astowski, Z. Hull, W. Tyburski, J. M. Dol e/ga and A. Papuzinski. The second, signifi cantlybroadenedand modifi ed, edition of the book is currently being prepared; it also takes into account theoutput ofPolish eco-philosophical and eco-ethical thought of the last dozen or more years.Of the latest publications worthy of note is an interesting monograph by L. S. Pyra devoted tothe


12/15

views of Holmes Rolston III (Pyra, 2003). The problem of ecological philosophy andenvironmental

ethics is also found in the works of other authors, including W. Bol oz, M. Ciszek, J. De/bowski,G.

Francuz, J. Jaronie, E. Kosmicki, A. Latawiec, D. Liszewski, Z. L epko, Z. Migus, A.Skowronski, Z.Wrblewski and S. Zie/ba.Let us add that ecological philosophy and environmental ethics at last have their own journal,Problems

of Eco-Development(edited by A. Pawl owski), and that these disciplines are systematicallytaught at manyPolish universities.In this very brief review of the standpoints, trends and orientations of ecological philosophy andenvironmental ethics, we must mention the works of Henryk Skolimowski. His writing has foundapermanent place in eco-philosophical thought. This philosopher says that the paradigm ofmechanisticand positivist thought, which is at the basis of the developmental trends of modern civilization,providesa one-sided interpretation of reality. This is predatory thinking regarding nature and it is in it thatweshould perceive the causes not only of ecological disasters but also social and ideologicaldisasters. TheEcological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development 107Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

direction of creative transformations should lead, according to Skolimowski, from mechanistic,analyticaland pragmatic understanding to ecological understanding, which is not a negation of the value

ofprogress, nor of the value of science, but another way of reading reality, another way ofperceivinghumans in the whole scheme of nature. Instead of atomistic tunnel vision, Skolimowskiproposes aholistic vision one that gives a proper perspective of the wholes, within the framework of whichtheplace of its individual fragments can be revealed. It is to such a concept of discovering the worldthatecological consciousness fully corresponds, being a holistic, integrating, therapeuticconsciousness parexcellence, and at the same time being in opposition to mechanistic consciousness. There is no

savingthe Earth without a change in our consciousness. If we wish to declare peace with the Earth,then aboveall we must change our predatory, parasitic, materialistic consciousness to a reverential one. Atthe basisof the new consciousness lies the assumption that the world is a sanctuary. In Skolimowskisopinion,this idea redefi nes humans relationship with the surrounding natural reality and reveals a newoptic of


13/15

varied relations with it, based on veneration, respect and reverence. Such an attitude is at thesame timean axiological principle of ecological ethics. The role of one of the supreme values in this ethic istakenon by responsibilityresponsibility for ones own life, the prosperity of future generations, theenvironment

and the future of the whole planet. In the world regarded as a sanctuary, we must take the roleofcustodian and carer, behaving with respect and love for the whole of life and the environment. Itis thisphilosophers belief that, until now, our way of thinking was dominated by perceiving the worldfroman economic perspective. What we should do is to see the reality surrounding us throughecologicalspectacles. Today, to think well, says Skolimowski, is to think ecologically. This concernstechnical,political and even religious thinking. Therefore, ecological philosophy is a matrix of a newunderstanding

of the cosmos and of a proper cooperation with nature and the whole world. Skolimowski isconvincedthat the ideas he proposes are able to provide the proper inspiration for all those who arelookingfor sense in a world threatened by civilization. They are presented in many publications, amongthemin Hope is the Mother of the Wise orLiving Philosophy(Skolimowski, 1989, 1993).

Also in Poland, the problem of ecological philosophy and environmental ethics is an area whereacademicdiscussion of various options, standpoints and directions is conducted. It is not possible topresentthe wealth of discussion here, but as an example let us focus on a few selected matters. In the

area ofenvironmental ethics, discussions and polemics continue mainly between followers ofanthropocentrismand representatives of weak anthropocentrism together with those who question thehomocentric pointof view, opting for biocentrism. The objects of heated debate and sometimes trenchant polemicsare thevarious views on the place of humans in the universe, on the different perceptions of a supremevalueand theoretical questions of justifi cation, also through various judgements on contemporaryculture andcivilization, as well as the concept of the development of the world and the vision of the future.

ConclusionDespite differences revealed between individual viewpoints, there are also many commonareas. Thereis no doubt that the representatives of all the directions in environmental ethics are convinced oftheneed to broaden the ethical value and to subject human activity in nature to a moral evaluation.In addition,all agree on the role of ethics in the ecological education of society, and all indicate the need to


14/15

build systems of values (eco-values) and moral codes aimed at environmental problems. Theyalso stressthe importance of forming ecological thought, sensibilities, conscience and an ecological attitudeasindispensable elements of an ethical protection of the natural and human environment. They arealso

united in a more general way by the desire to diagnose the causes of the ecological crisisthat themodern world is experiencing, to elaborate the best concepts to solve this and to construct sucha108 W. TyburskiCopyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008)DOI: 10.1002/sd

philosophy of development that would take into account both the needs of humans and theneeds ofnature. This is where the idea of sustainable development has its origin.

References

Bonenberg M. 1992. Etyka S rodowiskowa. Zaloz

.enia i Kierunki. UJ: Cracow.Callicott JB. 1989. In Defense of the Land Ethic. Essays in Environmental Philosophy. State University of New YorkPress: NewYork.Czartoszewski JW (ed.). 2002. Etyka Srodowiskowa Wyzwaniem XXI Wieku. UKSW: Warsaw.

Dole/ga JM. 1998. Cz lowiek w Zagroz.onym Srodowisku. ATK: Warsaw.

Fiut IS. 1999. Ekoetyki. Kierunki Rozwoju Aksjologii Wspl czesnej Przyjaznej S rodowisku. Abrys: Cracow.Gromczynski M. 1992. Codziennosc i Absolut w Filozofi i Ralpha Waldo Emersona. UL : L dz.Hull Z. 1995. Filozofi a i przyrodoznawstwo w ksztal towaniu myslenia ekologicznego. In Czlowiek i Srodowisko.Dyscypliny

Humanistyczne i Ekologia, Tyburski W (ed.). UMK: Torun; 1929.Leopold A. 1948/1987.A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There. Oxford University Press: New York.

L ukomski J. 1999. Prba Zbudowania Chrzescijan skiej Etyki Srodowiska Naturalnego. PAT: Cracow.Papuzinski A. 1998. Z.ycie-Nauka-Ekologia. Prolegomena do Kulturalistycznej Filozofi i Ekologii. WU WSP: Bydgoszcz.Papuzinski A (ed.). 1999. Wprowadzenie do Filozofi cznych Problemw Ekologii. WU WSP: Bydgoszcz.Passmore JA. 1980. Mans Responsibility for Nature. Ecological Problems and Western Traditions. Duckworth:London.

Pawl owski A. 1999. Odpowiedzialnos c za Przyrode/. PL: Lublin.Pawl owski A (ed.) 2003. Filozofi czne, Ekonomiczne, Inz.ynierskie i Przyrodnicze Uwarunkowania Zrwnowaz

.onego Rozwoju. PL:Lublin.

Pawlowski A (ed.) 2004. Filozofi czne, Spol eczne i Ekonomiczne Uwarunkowania Zrwnowaz.onego Rozwoju. PL: Lublin.

Pia/tek Z. 1998. Etyka S rodowiskowa. Nowe Spojrzenie na Miejsce Cz lowieka w Przyrodzie. UJ: Cracow.Pyra LS. 2003. Environment and Values. Holmes Rolston IIIs Environmental Philosophy. AR: Cracow.Rolston H III. 1989. Philosophy Gone Wild. Prometheus: Loughton.


15/15

Seed J, Macy J, Fleming P, Naess A. 1988. Thinking Like A Mountain. Towards a Council of All Beings. New Society:Philadelphia,PA.Skolimowski H. 1989. Nadzieja Matka/ Ma/drych, Eseje o Ekologii. BEETPFE: Warsaw.Skolimowski H. 1993. Filozofi a Z.yja/ca. Ekofi lozofi a Jako Drzewo Z

.ycia. Pusty Obl ok: Warsaw.Slipko T, Zwolinski A. 1999. Rozdroz.a Ekologii. WAM: Cracow.Taylor PW. 1986. Respect for Nature. A Theory of Environmental Ethics. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ.Thoreau HD. 1854. Walden, or Life in the Woods. http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/205 [31 December 2006].Tyburski W. 1990. O Idei Humanizmu Ekologicznego. TKSK: Warsaw.Tyburski W. 1993. Pojednac Sie/ z Ziemia/. W Kre/gu Zagadnien Humanizmu Ekologicznego. UMK: Torun.Tyburski W (ed.). 1996a. Ekofi lozofi a i Bioetyka. UMK: Torun.Tyburski W (ed.). 1996b. EkonomiaEkologiaEtyka. UMK: Torun.Tyburski W (ed.). 1998. Etyka Srodowiskowa. Teoretyczne i Praktyczne Implikacje. UMK: Torun.

Waloszczyk K. 1996. Kryzys Ekologiczny w Swietle Ekofi lozofi i. PL : L dz.Wawrzyniak J. 2000. Teoretyczne Podstawy Neonaturalistycznej Bioetyki Srodowiskowej. UAM: Poznan.

Correspondence To

Documents

Transcript of Correspondence To