By Mark Coeckelbergh
Today it really is widely known that we are facing pressing and critical environmental difficulties and we all know a lot approximately them, but we do little or no. What explains this loss of motivation and alter? Why is it so demanding to alter our lives? This e-book addresses this query through a philosophical inquiry into the stipulations of risk for environmental switch. It discusses how we will be able to develop into extra stimulated to do environmental sturdy and what sort of wisdom we'd like for this, and explores the family members among motivation, wisdom, and modernity. After reviewing a wide diversity of attainable philosophical and mental responses to environmental apathy and inertia, the writer argues for relocating clear of a latest specialise in both indifferent cause and regulate (Stoicism and Enlightenment cause) or the traditional, the emotions, and the actual (Romanticism), either one of which make attainable disengaging and alienating modes of with regards to our surroundings. as an alternative he develops the concept of environmental ability: an idea that bridges the space among wisdom and motion, re-interprets environmental advantage, and indicates an environmental ethics based on event, knowledge and skillful engagement with our surroundings. the writer then explores the results of this ethics for our lives: it alterations the best way we predict approximately , and care for, health and wellbeing, foodstuff, animals, strength, weather swap, politics, and technology.
Read Online or Download Environmental Skill: Motivation, Knowledge, and the Possibility of a Non-Romantic Environmental Ethics PDF
Best ethics & morality books
This research of latest highbrow attitudes in the direction of nationalism exhibits how present discourses of democracy, social justice and liberalism take without any consideration the lifestyles of good points of the state country which those discourses themselves don't recognize explicitly.
This quantity offers with contrasting advancements within the interval among 1400-1550. it truly is person who is characterised through a look for better own liberty and extra possibilities for artistic expression, at the one hand, and a quest to safe balance through developing binding norms, at the different.
- Knowledge and Inquiry: Essays on the Pragmatism of Isaac Levi
- Politics of Globalization
- The Virtues of Happiness: A Theory of the Good Life
- The Philosophy of Biology (Oxford Readings in Philosophy)
- Hypocrisy and Integrity: Machiavelli, Rousseau, and the Ethics of Politics
Extra resources for Environmental Skill: Motivation, Knowledge, and the Possibility of a Non-Romantic Environmental Ethics
What does this argument imply for my initial problem formulation? In a sense, the Platonic/Socratic position implies that there is no problem of motivation—at least not in the way I defined the problem in the introduction—but only a problem of moral knowledge. If knowing the good is sufficient for a virtuous life, as Plato and Socrates argue, then how could there be a gap between moral knowledge and moral action? Once we knew environmental good, there would be no problem of motivation. Socrates—at least towards the end of the Protagoras—thinks virtue can be taught.
We can find this idea already in Plato. For example, in a famous part of the Phaedrus (245c–249d) Socrates compares the soul to a chariot pulled by two winged horses. One is noble and represents rationality and morality; the other is ‘the opposite in breed’ and represents the irrational passions and appetites. The charioteer tries to avoid that the horses go different ways; he must make sure that the chariot (the soul) arrives at the truth. ) The Greek and Roman Stoics further emphasized the rational self-control that was already praised by Plato and Aristotle.
In these cases, the Augustinian explanation is less relevant and we might want to stick to the explanations already offered. However, there is also another interesting route to understanding the lack of environmental motivation at the individual level. In the previous section I focused on the case of the ‘unwilling addict’. But Frankfurt also mentioned another category: the wanton. If we still want to do justice to the intuition that some deeds are much worse than others and indeed constitute something that deserves the name “evil” considering its devastating consequences, but at the same time avoid a heavy, cumbersome metaphysics (“religious” or not) and pay attention to the everyday aspects of environmentally relevant moral psychology, then we could connect Frankfurt’s concept of the wanton to Hannah Arendt’s thinking about evil.