Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Geoethics, a Philosophical Hybrid of European Origin

View through CrossRef
<p>European philosophies shape geoethics. The Culture-Nature-Dichotomy (<em>“appropriate behaviours and practices, wherever human activities interact with the Earth system”</em> [1; p.30]) and the associated anthropocentric interpretation of the human condition [1; p.58-60] is an example.</p><p>The European post-medieval cultural models [2, 3] led to engage early with scientific studies of Earth [4, 5], to merge science, research, engineering, economy and applied ethics into a massive societal venture [6, 7], and to shape global hegemonic societal practices [8, 9]. These developments provide the socio-historical foundation of geoethics. It implies depicting Culture and Nature differently, respectively using either idealistic or materialistic philosophies.</p><p>Tinted by European cultural models, geoethics is based on geosciences knowledge and applies philosophical materialism when inspecting Nature. However, geoethics displays philosophical idealism when inspecting Culture, e.g. the virtuous individual's societal role [1; p.33-43]. Recently, an academic noticed: <em>“not even a single word [in geoethics] about the structural determinations upon individuals in the particular form of social organisation where they live </em>[a].” Such a critical view (absence to apply philosophical materialism) is valuable when considering that geoethics aims to advise about “<em>appropriate [socio-historical/cultural] behaviours and practices</em>”.</p><p>Such considerations point at the need to re-inspect the philosophical basis of geoethics. Merely being ‘tinted’ by European cultural models is unsatisfying. Instead, analyses should show whether to apply idealistic and materialistic philosophies. Investigating, for example, whether to inspect Culture like Nature using philosophical materialism, would test the consistency of the current philosophical hybrid, geoethics; subsequently, such analyses should elucidate geoethics’ anthropocentric bearings.</p><div> <div> <p>[a] anonymous review published in Quaternary (2019); https://www.mdpi.com/2571-550X/2/2/19/review_report (1st round reviewer 2 report)</p> </div> </div>
Copernicus GmbH
Title: Geoethics, a Philosophical Hybrid of European Origin
Description:
<p>European philosophies shape geoethics.
The Culture-Nature-Dichotomy (<em>“appropriate behaviours and practices, wherever human activities interact with the Earth system”</em> [1; p.
30]) and the associated anthropocentric interpretation of the human condition [1; p.
58-60] is an example.
</p><p>The European post-medieval cultural models [2, 3] led to engage early with scientific studies of Earth [4, 5], to merge science, research, engineering, economy and applied ethics into a massive societal venture [6, 7], and to shape global hegemonic societal practices [8, 9].
These developments provide the socio-historical foundation of geoethics.
It implies depicting Culture and Nature differently, respectively using either idealistic or materialistic philosophies.
</p><p>Tinted by European cultural models, geoethics is based on geosciences knowledge and applies philosophical materialism when inspecting Nature.
However, geoethics displays philosophical idealism when inspecting Culture, e.
g.
the virtuous individual's societal role [1; p.
33-43].
Recently, an academic noticed: <em>“not even a single word [in geoethics] about the structural determinations upon individuals in the particular form of social organisation where they live </em>[a].
” Such a critical view (absence to apply philosophical materialism) is valuable when considering that geoethics aims to advise about “<em>appropriate [socio-historical/cultural] behaviours and practices</em>”.
</p><p>Such considerations point at the need to re-inspect the philosophical basis of geoethics.
Merely being ‘tinted’ by European cultural models is unsatisfying.
Instead, analyses should show whether to apply idealistic and materialistic philosophies.
Investigating, for example, whether to inspect Culture like Nature using philosophical materialism, would test the consistency of the current philosophical hybrid, geoethics; subsequently, such analyses should elucidate geoethics’ anthropocentric bearings.
</p><div> <div> <p>[a] anonymous review published in Quaternary (2019); https://www.
mdpi.
com/2571-550X/2/2/19/review_report (1st round reviewer 2 report)</p> </div> </div>.

Related Results

Designing Geoethics for Cultural Milieus: The Inverse Problem
Designing Geoethics for Cultural Milieus: The Inverse Problem
Studies in geoethics offer normative frameworks for the responsible conduct of geoscientists and citizens in their interactions with Earth's telluric aspects [1]. While the express...
School on Geoethics and Natural Issues
School on Geoethics and Natural Issues
<p>Founded on July 2019, the “School on Geoethics and Natural Issue” (http://www.geoethics.org/geoethics-school) is a scientific, internat...
An expanded definition of geoethics
An expanded definition of geoethics
Geoethics incorporates instances, categories, concepts, principles, and values already present in the cultural debate, and develops an original theoretical and interdisciplinary fr...
Geoethics, emerging from splendid segregation?
Geoethics, emerging from splendid segregation?
<p>Geoethics’ programmatic essence is <em>“research and reflection on the values which underpin appropriate behaviours and p...
A new geoethics for the Anthropocene
A new geoethics for the Anthropocene
There is a new, burgeoning literature on geoethics in the geosciences (Peppoloni and Di Capua 2021). It stems from the assumption that understanding the Earth, analyzing natural pr...
Integrating Geoethics, Geoeducation, and Sense of Place: Nourishing Sustainable Human-Earth Practices in the Anthropocene
Integrating Geoethics, Geoeducation, and Sense of Place: Nourishing Sustainable Human-Earth Practices in the Anthropocene
The Anthropocene demands a critical reassessment of humanity’s relationship with the Earth, bringing geoethics, geoenvironmental education, and the concept of sense of pl...
Relational Geoscientific Pragmatism as the foundation of the Geoethics Method
Relational Geoscientific Pragmatism as the foundation of the Geoethics Method
In an increasingly interconnected and vulnerable world, combining pragmatism and relationality in geosciences is essential for addressing environmental challenges ethically and res...
Expanding Geoethics: Interrelations with Geoenvironmental Education and Sense of Place
Expanding Geoethics: Interrelations with Geoenvironmental Education and Sense of Place
Human existence and progress hinge on sustainability and resilience, especially in the Anthropocene Era, where the diversity of nature plays a critical role. Central to this endeav...

Back to Top