Anthropocentrism and the Politics of the Living (Chapter 4)

Presentation from Xinjia Pang

The ‘end of nature’ has been widely proclaimed.  It refers to the ongoing biophysical destruction of ecosystems, habitats, forests, species, individual creatures, and climate through widely varying processes of extraction, consumption, and production. The daily extinction of species, the general homogenization of species around the world, and the transformation of terrestrial and marine ecosystems, all due to human activity, all point to an end of material nature.

Humans have unfairly, or unwittingly, privileged their moral standing over non-human life, which has been reduced to some form of purely instrumental use. In environmental ethics, then, the response to this kind of anthropocentrism has been to discuss alternative subjects of moral value, such as biocentrism, in which all forms of life share in some form of value, or ecocentrism, putting ecosystems front and center. 

However, when non-anthropocentrism, especially ecocentrism, deals with the two important relationships in the real world, it emphasizes the relationship between man and nature and ignores the relationship between people. In fact, these two relationships are intertwined. The relationship between people is a deeper factor affecting the relationship between man and nature. Although its influence is indirect, it is decisive. Non-anthropocentrism sees inequalities between people and creatures, species, and nature, but does not think deeply about what is hidden behind this inequality is precisely the inequality between people. When they emphasize the need to achieve equality between man and nature, they ignore the serious inequalities between people in the real world.

Resources Come from: Anthropocentrism and the Politics of the Living (chapter 4) - Rafi Youatt