EURO-ECO 2009 Hanover 3 - 4 Dezember 2009	Environmental, Engineering - Economic and Legal Aspects for Sustainable Living
	European Academy of Natural Sciences, Hanover European Scientific Society, Hanover University of Bremen, Bremen

Home

Abstracts EURO-ECO 2009

Contact

Disclaimer

The type of ecological consciousness reflects the ideas of the relationship between man and nature. One distinguishes two kinds of ecological consciousness: anthropocentrism and eco-centrism.

Anthropocentrism is based on the formula of “man’s exclusiveness”, the opposition of man to nature. There are historic and contemporary roots of it. In industrial societies the manifestations of it include the domination of the principle of receiving profit at any price, competition, fighting for raw materials and energy resources on the international level; in the countries of the third world – uncontrolled growth of population, low standards of culture, etc. In the course of the evolution of contemporary society from industrial to post-industrial there developed new premises for a new vision of the relationship between man, society and nature to be reflected in the conceptions of “coevolution”, “new ecological thinking”, etc. One of such approaches is represented by the conception of “eco-centrism”, which “equalizes in rights” man and nature, makes emphasis on harmonization of the relationship between them.

Eco-centrism is based on the understanding of the necessity of co-evolution of man and biosphere:

1. The development of man in harmony with nature is of greatest value. Anything pertaining to nature is admitted to have the right to existence irrespective of its usefulness or harm for man. Man is not a proprietor of nature.
2. One refuses the hierarchal picture of the world. Man is admitted not to have special privileges.
3. The aim of interaction with nature is to meet the demands of both man and entire environmental community.
4. ”Ecological imperative”: the only right, permitted things are those that do not destroy the ecological balance.
5. Nature is perceived as an equal subject of interaction with man.
6. The interaction with nature involves the use of ethical norms.
7. Activities for the environmental protection are dictated by the necessity to protect nature for its own sake.

The use of the term “eco-centrism” may give rise to certain objections. When speaking about centrism, centralization, etc., one bears in mind that a centre is a part of the whole, rather a small part of it. Here the “man-nature” pair embraces the whole of the world! It is supposed that the centre should be a subject or an object, here in the foreground – the relationship between them (man and nature in harmony). Doubt raises the inclination to ascribe “demands” to nature, perceive it as “an equal subject” of the interaction with man as well as the use of ethical norms and rules for the interaction with the world of nature. Will the crisis of morality in the contemporary society affect the attitude towards the object world?

To a certain extent such an approach recreates a monistic and anthropomorphic paradigm. It appears that a new approach to the definition of the kind of relationship between man and nature should reflect, to a higher degree, the pluralistic paradigm, typical of post-neoclassic philosophy