In Respect for Nature, Paul Taylor develops the following four elements of the biocentric outlook on nature:
1. Humans are members of the Earth's community of life in the same sense and on the same terms as other living things.
2. The natural world is an interdependent system.
3. Each organism is a Teleological Center of Life (TCL) with a good of its own.
4. Humans are not inherently superior to other living things.
Taylor believes that if one concedes and accepts the first three components then acceptance of the fourth component is not unreasonable. He also suggests that in order to adopt the attitude of respect for nature one must accept all four elements of the biocentric outlook. “Once we reject the claim that humans are
…show more content…
On the other hand, nearly all organisms can exist without humans. There are some exceptions to this, such as endangered species or pets but, in general, most wildlife does not need human presence in order to survive. This is a fact of life and is accepted as an ecological truth. Accepting and understanding our equality with and interdependence on the Earth’s community of life is the first step in adopting the attitude of respect for nature.
The third component, however, is somewhat difficult to grasp and harder for some to accept; but it is also the most crucial when adopting the attitude of respect. If one fails to accept Taylor’s third element then one cannot adopt the attitude of respect. This is where Taylor is mistaken. Taylor fails, or at least neglects, to consider the importance of his third element. Instead, he places most of the emphasis on moving to deny human superiority and then concludes that by doing so only then can one respect nature. Yet, in order to allow Taylor’s fourth element, one must first concede that all Teleological Centers of Life have equal inherent worth. Therefore, when one accepts and believes the third component of the biocentric outlook only then can they adopt the attitude of respect. Subsequently, I plan to show that the third element and not the fourth is fundamental in adopting the attitude of respect.
In Taylor’s third element, all living organisms (plants, animals, insects, fungi, microbes)
1 I have been studying the traits and dispositions of the lower animals (so-called), and contrasting them with the traits and dispositions of man. I find the result humiliating to me. For it obliges me to renounce my allegiance to the Darwinian theory of the Ascent of Man from the Lower Animals, since it now seems plain to me that that theory ought to be vacated in favor of a new and truer one, this new and truer one to be named the Descent of Man from the Higher
The self sustenance of "non-human" nature is an essential corrective to human egoism. Arrogance and apathy will further worsen the situation. Until now, William Cronan has been generally agreeable; however, his opposition to Bill McKibben's ideas in The End of Nature is quite puzzling.
Nature is the playground for every human. It is essential that we include nature in our lives; it keeps us on our correct path. However, if we dismiss ourselves from nature, we begin to stray from our correct path. We become engulfed in the distractions from the modern world . The only approach to appropriate this quandary is to break our pervicacious ways and return to peaceful serenity known as nature.
This way of thinking regards the whole ecosphere as deserving consideration, making all humans, organisms, animals, have equal rights and should be valued and cared for.
Personally, I am sympathetic to Paul Taylor’s idea that people should respect for every living organism. From his book “Respect for Nature”, he proposes a definition of environmental ethics called Biocentric Individualism. It basically means that humans are not superior to any living organisms. Humans are a part of nature, so humans should have moral relations and connections with every living organism in the world. Thus, human’s obligations, actions and responsibilities should be often determined with respect to those relations and connections. Moreover, he suggests that every organism has intrinsic value such as unique biological functions or natural goals. To maintain a good natural system, organisms have to contribute and function together. Hence, all organisms should have equal inherent worth.
Paul Taylor approaches “respect for nature” as a moral attitude, meaning that if an individual is unable to comprehend the “meaning and conditions of applicability” of the attitude, they are also unable to have the attitude as a part of their “moral outlook” (Taylor 103). “Respect for nature” is defined by two essential concepts, the good of a being, and the concept of inherent worth.
Anthropocentrism describes a human-centered view of our relationship with the environment. An anthropocentric denies or ignores the notion that nonhuman entities can have rights. In contrast biocentrism ascribes value to certain living things or to the biotic realm in general. In this perpective human life and non human life both have ethical standing. Ecocentrism judges actions in terms of their effects on whole ecological systems, which consist of living and nonliving elements and the relationships among them.
Since the beginning of time, mankind has depended on nature for survival. Although, throughout the years society has learned to manipulate nature for their own selfish advantages. In the passage written by Richard Louv, he utilizes rhetorical questions, repetition, and a tone of nostalgia to stress that sad truth about the separation of mankind and nature.
Journal #9. Page 101- “The defining feature of the anthropocence is the transformative role played by our own species.”
A question I have for you is how you do see humans in relations to Nature? Nature is a vague term, and the way you emphasize people to embrace its simplicity implies humans were apart from Nature to begin with. This inherently
Throughout today’s society there are several different cultural perspectives which form theoretical and practical understandings of natural environments, creating various human-nature relationship types. In this essay, I will describe and evaluate different ways of knowing nature and the impact of these views on human-nature relationships. From this, I will then explore my own human-nature relationship and reflect on how my personal experiences, beliefs and values has led me to this view, whilst highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each and reflecting upon Martin’s (1996) continuum.
Under the circumstances, there are still substantial ways that psycho-analytic theories play an important part of the nature perspective. It contains human’s emotional, developmental, defensive, and unconscious goals and processes.
In life we are all confronted with the idea of nature along with society. Although both have their pros and cons they work together to give us freedom and order among individuals.
Another adjustment to the microscope, and we can examine Leopold's biocentric opinion of how environmental ethics should be governed. His approach enlarges the moral category to include soils, waters, plants and animals and claims our obligation is to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. Philosophers Devall and Sessions further define the biocentric view with the concept of deep ecology. Devall and Sessions argue that "the well-being and flourishing of human and non-human life have value in themselves. These values are independent of the usefulness of the non-human world for human purposes." (503)
Despite what mankind would like to believe, humans are animals. As multi-celled organisms, we consume other organic matter, change the land for own uses as a beaver would build a dam, and as other mammals, we are all fed breast milk from our mothers when we were young. Yet there is this disconnection and alienation of the human race towards other species. Moreover, through fear of taking action, the convenience provided to us if we simply choose to ignore the environment, and the alienation of other species that are endangered by our actions, the hostile and uncaring attitude of humans towards nature is the core reason for many of the problems in our environment today.