Exploring Environmental Ethics: From Exclusion of More-than-Human Beings Towards a New Materialist Paradigm

IF 0.2 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Avant Pub Date : 2023-10-19 DOI:10.26913/ava2202313
Gülşah Göçmen
{"title":"Exploring Environmental Ethics: From Exclusion of More-than-Human Beings Towards a New Materialist Paradigm","authors":"Gülşah Göçmen","doi":"10.26913/ava2202313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Environmental ethics deals with discussing the ethical framework of environmental values, their organization and regulation, and their ethical premises. One of the main cul-de-sacs that environmental ethics has is its anthropocentrism that can be observed through its diverse ethical approaches—even ecocentric ones, developed as non-anthropocentric egalitarian alternatives. This article aims to question the exclusiveness of Anthropos, the practices, values, and discourses that determine the scope and course of environmental ethics, and the exclusion of nonhuman animals or more-than human beings from its focus. It first examines the main approaches in environmental ethics (land ethic, deep ecology, social ecology, and postmodern environmental ethics)—biocentric, ecocentric, anthropocentric, socialist, postmodern—and reveals that they are but limited to the human perspective, deeply rooted in human exceptionalism. All of these approaches provide us with a critical frame that still needs to be deconstructed so that they will not project an anthropocentric orientation. This article posits that the compass of environmental ethics, recently aligning itself to embrace the more-than-human world in its ecocentric attitude, still needs to be revisited for its discourses of exclusion. At this point, new materialism functions as a prolific theoretical site as it diminishes the classical boundaries between human and animal or subject and object that anthropocentric environmental ethics relies on. With such concepts as “agential realism” (Barad), “transcorporeal ethics” (Alaimo), “vibrant matter” (Bennett), or “storied matter” (Oppermann and Iovino) the new materialist view of the human and the nonhuman evolves to end set dualities in the discourses of environmental ethics. This article concludes that the new materialist theory destabilizes any anthropocentric position in environmental ethics and includes more-than-human beings in its ethical focus, discarding any dualities that serve anthropocentrism or human exceptionalism.","PeriodicalId":43453,"journal":{"name":"Avant","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Avant","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26913/ava2202313","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Environmental ethics deals with discussing the ethical framework of environmental values, their organization and regulation, and their ethical premises. One of the main cul-de-sacs that environmental ethics has is its anthropocentrism that can be observed through its diverse ethical approaches—even ecocentric ones, developed as non-anthropocentric egalitarian alternatives. This article aims to question the exclusiveness of Anthropos, the practices, values, and discourses that determine the scope and course of environmental ethics, and the exclusion of nonhuman animals or more-than human beings from its focus. It first examines the main approaches in environmental ethics (land ethic, deep ecology, social ecology, and postmodern environmental ethics)—biocentric, ecocentric, anthropocentric, socialist, postmodern—and reveals that they are but limited to the human perspective, deeply rooted in human exceptionalism. All of these approaches provide us with a critical frame that still needs to be deconstructed so that they will not project an anthropocentric orientation. This article posits that the compass of environmental ethics, recently aligning itself to embrace the more-than-human world in its ecocentric attitude, still needs to be revisited for its discourses of exclusion. At this point, new materialism functions as a prolific theoretical site as it diminishes the classical boundaries between human and animal or subject and object that anthropocentric environmental ethics relies on. With such concepts as “agential realism” (Barad), “transcorporeal ethics” (Alaimo), “vibrant matter” (Bennett), or “storied matter” (Oppermann and Iovino) the new materialist view of the human and the nonhuman evolves to end set dualities in the discourses of environmental ethics. This article concludes that the new materialist theory destabilizes any anthropocentric position in environmental ethics and includes more-than-human beings in its ethical focus, discarding any dualities that serve anthropocentrism or human exceptionalism.
探索环境伦理:从超越人类的排斥走向新的唯物主义范式
环境伦理涉及讨论环境价值的伦理框架,它们的组织和规范,以及它们的伦理前提。环境伦理学的主要死胡同之一是它的人类中心主义,这可以通过它的各种伦理方法来观察到——甚至是生态中心主义,作为非人类中心主义的平等主义替代品而发展起来。本文旨在质疑人类的排他性、决定环境伦理范围和过程的实践、价值观和话语,以及将非人类动物或人类以外的动物排除在其关注范围之外。本文首先考察了环境伦理学的主要研究方法(土地伦理学、深层生态学、社会生态学和后现代环境伦理学)——生物中心主义、生态中心主义、人类中心主义、社会主义和后现代主义,并揭示了它们都局限于人类的视角,深深植根于人类例外论。所有这些方法都为我们提供了一个仍然需要解构的关键框架,这样它们就不会投射出人类中心主义的取向。这篇文章认为,环境伦理的指南针,最近在其生态中心的态度中调整自己以拥抱超越人类的世界,仍然需要重新审视其排斥的话语。在这一点上,新唯物主义作为一个多产的理论站点,因为它减少了人类中心环境伦理学所依赖的人与动物或主体与客体之间的经典界限。有了诸如“代理现实主义”(巴拉德)、“超物质伦理学”(阿拉莫)、“充满活力的物质”(班尼特)或“故事物质”(奥珀曼和约维诺)等概念,人类和非人类的新唯物主义观点逐渐结束了环境伦理学话语中的二元性。本文的结论是,新唯物主义理论动摇了环境伦理学中任何人类中心主义的立场,并将超越人类纳入其伦理焦点,抛弃了任何为人类中心主义或人类例外论服务的二元性。
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
Avant
Avant HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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