Technocentrism and Ecocentrism

Doaa Salman
{"title":"Technocentrism and Ecocentrism","authors":"Doaa Salman","doi":"10.36096/BRSS.V1I1.98","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"“Prevention is better than cure” is a proverb commonly used to highlight how it is better to avoid a problem from the start rather than fixing the damage afterwards. When considering this concept to our approach to the environment, we encounter two schools of thought; Ecocentrism and Technocentrism. Ecocentrism places the ecosystem at the center and stress that we need to limit our natural resource exploitation, so that we can conserve the environment and prevent its destruction. Technocentrism, on the other hand, focuses on technology and science as a way to repair any damage done to the environment rather than changing ethical perspectives on environmental issues. This paper seeks to explore the two ideologies by comparing between Finland and Bhutan; two countries that seem to resemble the two approaches. Finland is considered one of the highly technologically advanced countries, in addition to its reputation for environmental protection. Bhutan is a Himalayan Kingdom that is known for its strong environment conservation and their intriguing approach to sustainable development. The paper compares between the two countries sustainable development approach, environment, and health. It was concluded that, in terms of the environment; Bhutan is doing much better than Finland. Finland’s carbon emissions reduction was mainly because they produce goods in other countries which increase the other countries emissions not Finland. Additionally, high consumption levels in Finland are a major threat to the environment. As for health, there is no extreme difference; however, Bhutan’s health care system is still improving. Yet, the two countries are facing serious issues regarding mental health. Ultimately, the ecocentric approach appears to be much better; especially, in this day and age as many downsides of technology keep unfolding.  ","PeriodicalId":290828,"journal":{"name":"Bussecon Review of Social Sciences (2687-2285)","volume":"98 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bussecon Review of Social Sciences (2687-2285)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36096/BRSS.V1I1.98","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

“Prevention is better than cure” is a proverb commonly used to highlight how it is better to avoid a problem from the start rather than fixing the damage afterwards. When considering this concept to our approach to the environment, we encounter two schools of thought; Ecocentrism and Technocentrism. Ecocentrism places the ecosystem at the center and stress that we need to limit our natural resource exploitation, so that we can conserve the environment and prevent its destruction. Technocentrism, on the other hand, focuses on technology and science as a way to repair any damage done to the environment rather than changing ethical perspectives on environmental issues. This paper seeks to explore the two ideologies by comparing between Finland and Bhutan; two countries that seem to resemble the two approaches. Finland is considered one of the highly technologically advanced countries, in addition to its reputation for environmental protection. Bhutan is a Himalayan Kingdom that is known for its strong environment conservation and their intriguing approach to sustainable development. The paper compares between the two countries sustainable development approach, environment, and health. It was concluded that, in terms of the environment; Bhutan is doing much better than Finland. Finland’s carbon emissions reduction was mainly because they produce goods in other countries which increase the other countries emissions not Finland. Additionally, high consumption levels in Finland are a major threat to the environment. As for health, there is no extreme difference; however, Bhutan’s health care system is still improving. Yet, the two countries are facing serious issues regarding mental health. Ultimately, the ecocentric approach appears to be much better; especially, in this day and age as many downsides of technology keep unfolding.  
技术中心主义和生态中心主义
“防患于未然”是一句常用的谚语,强调最好从一开始就避免问题,而不是事后修复。当我们将这个概念与我们的环境方法相结合时,我们遇到了两种思想流派;生态中心主义和技术中心主义。生态中心主义以生态系统为中心,强调我们需要限制自然资源的开发,这样我们才能保护环境,防止环境遭到破坏。另一方面,技术中心主义侧重于将技术和科学作为一种修复对环境造成的任何损害的方法,而不是改变对环境问题的伦理观点。本文试图通过芬兰和不丹的比较来探讨这两种意识形态;这两个国家似乎与这两种方法相似。芬兰被认为是技术高度发达的国家之一,此外还享有环境保护的声誉。不丹是一个喜马拉雅王国,以其强大的环境保护和有趣的可持续发展方式而闻名。本文对两国的可持续发展方式、环境和健康进行了比较。结论是,就环境而言;不丹比芬兰做得好得多。芬兰的碳排放量减少主要是因为他们在其他国家生产的商品增加了其他国家的排放量,而不是芬兰。此外,芬兰的高消费水平是对环境的主要威胁。至于健康,没有极端的差别;然而,不丹的医疗保健系统仍在改善。然而,两国在心理健康方面面临严重问题。最终,生态中心的方法似乎要好得多;特别是,在这个时代,许多技术的缺点不断显现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信