Proceedings of the XXIII World Congress of Philosophy

Buddhist religious teachings are nature and environment based, holistic and pragmatic in approach. Its environmentalists extend loving-kindness and compassion beyond people and animals to include plants and the earth itself. Hence, in Buddhism, both animate and inanimate objects are similarly important because they are reciprocally interlinked and interdependent. Existentially, buddhists affirm that all sentient beings share the fundamental conditions of birth, old age, suffering, and death. Buddha himself decides to share this existential insight into the cause and cessation of suffering which is regarded by the tradition as an act of universal compassion (karuna) and friendliness (maitree). Buddhist environmentalists assert that the mindful awareness of the universality of suffering produces compassionate empathy for all forms of life, particularly for all sentient species. Buddhist environmental movement suggests Buddhism to be an effective force for maintaining environmental poise, the traditional buddhist emphasis on individual moral and spiritual transformation must be adjusted to address more forcefully the structures of oppression, exploitation, and environmental degradation. It recognizes the value of all things/objects, which seems a very vital and necessary component in recognition of ecological articulation for human development. Buddhist ecological outlook is not only a retreat from the world but a place, where all forms of life, human, animal, and plant, live in a cooperative microcosm of a larger ecosystem and as a community, where humans can develop an ecological ethic. Such an ethic highlights the virtues of restraint, simplicity, loving-kindness, compassion, equanimity, patience, wisdom, nonviolence, and generosity. These virtues represent moral ideals for all members of Buddhism which are equally efficacious for all animate and inanimate species of the world. Many other points relevant to the topic will be discussed in the full paper.

Academic African American philosophy is a specialized sub-discipline of American philosophy as it is taught in institutions of higher education. As a sub-discipline, it has its preferred topics of research which do not include (possibly have excluded) environmental philosophy, a larger sub-discipline and field of study as well as a pedagogical approach practiced by academic philosophers. Environmental philosophy has grown exponentially in size, scope and popularity in the past 25 years. In its poverty of interest and research in environmental philosophy, African American philosophers are not reflective of African American interests and investments in Black cultural concerns relevant to environmental issues. With a few exceptions, African American philosophy has exhibited in its research agendas, ethical positions, and cultural arguments, a general disregard for significant Black ecojustice scholarship, sociopolitical movements and popular, mediated manifestations of Black environmentalism. However, this academic vacuum is collapsing as the next generation of African American graduate philosophy students begin to research, write, and teach environmental philosophy.

Though ecology is mainly regarded as a sub-discipline of biology, today ecological problems are dealt with by different kinds of scientific and philosophical studies. As one of the new sub disciplines of philosophy, philosophical ecology tackles ecological problems from an ethical point of view and puts man’s responsibility for ecological disasters into question. Ecological analyses include not only human beings, but also animals and plants as well as the inanimate components of the environment such as soil, rocks, and water. On the other side, philosophical anthropology is concerned with human being as its object, putting aside other components of nature. Criticizing the so called conventional ethics which takes only human being as valuable, philosophical ecology tries to combine the ecological and anthropological perspectives and shed light on the ecological problems of our age. In this paper, I will try to show that an anthropocentric point of view cannot prevent ecological disasters without recognizing the ecological cycle in which each part can survive only connected with other parts but also that an ecological perspective cannot reach its aim without realizing the central position of human being in nature.

The majority of people acknowledge the change in the world following a law-like reality that has appeared not only in the human life cycle but also in other creations and non-creations, according to their ontological perspective. However, studies have shown that the climate has changed whether people acknowledge it or not, following an epistemic perspective in philosophy that brings to light information of our modern world. Effects from climate change include disasters and other phenomena such as El Nino, La Nina, global warming, and the greenhouse effect. It is clear that both nature and humans are important actors influencing climate change. Increasing populations in many countries, along with the effects of capitalism, are major factors that lead to climatic change. Consequently, scholars have at least two serious concerns: Do we have responsibilities towards future generations? In addition, do future generations have a right to a sustainable environment? This article encourages answers to these questions. A “safety valve” may be an effective way to reach the elusive sustainability in conjunction with the four noble truths of Buddhism and the philosophy of the “sufficiency economy”. Not only older but also younger people need to take the responsibility to work together in order to preserve and protect the environment.

The process of human alienation from the natural world has led to the current crisis of the system “Man-Nature”, expressing a fragmented worldview that is information oriented and pragmatic. To overcome this alienation, people should realize that they exist in a particular reality, which is described as the ecological world. This world has knowledge of the opportunities provided by living creatures. Extracting this information is an active process of direct perception of the environment. Disclosing meanings of nature, man forms an environmentally oriented consciousness which determines its place in the natural existence. Environmental consciousness is an orientation focused on understanding the unity of existence, including the environment and people.

The key to global climate justice is how to define or distribute greenhouse-gas (sometimes abbreviated GHG) emissions rights in different countries. Three questions are to be answered: First, what does global climate justice distribute? Second, on what principle does it distribute? Third, what is the moral foundation of the principle? The thesis analyzes the peculiarity of GHG emissions permits as a global public resource and its consequent ethical issues. On the ground of egalitarianism, it proves the basic principle of distributing GHG emissions permits required by global climate justice, and the basic ethical ground of global climate justice accepted by international community.

This paper argues that moral pluralism is the best theory of environmental ethics. Pluralism has been widely used in legal and medical ethics, but not in environmental ethics. Current theories of environmental ethics make two errors: (a) attempting directly to derive non-consequential obligations (duties, rights, respect, and justice) from values, and (b) failing to explain and resolve indecision and disagreement. This paper argues that moral pluralism does not make the two errors. In addition, pluralism is theoretically justified by giving a complete account of the depth, particularity, and diversity of human moral experience, including non-consequential duties to the environment. Pluralism is not arbitrary moral relativism. Rooted in the way the world actually is, moral pluralism is like the sciences in that lower-level generalizations (basic principles) rest on particular facts, events, and cases in the world. Because pluralism’s moral principles are derived from facts about cases, the principles are inductively warranted, confirmed, and revisable. What is needed today is an ethical theory that will empower decision-makers, legitimize tolerance, and peacefully resolve problems, either by producing agreement or by explaining the reasons for the continuing disagreements. Pluralism is that theory.

Since the Club of Rome published “Limits to Growth” in 1972, the environmental problems have received the attention of people around the world and have become a global issue. The international community has also organized special meetings to promote the study of environmental issues. One of the most important meetings is the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held every year since 1972. The most important issue is on how to deal with climate change, which has become an international mainstream issue. From the perspective of environmental justice, the paper is a brief analysis of the negotiations on international climate changes, based on the opportunities of the 2009 Copenhagen Summit, the 2010 Cancun Summit and the 2011 South Africa Bender Climate Summit.

Environmental virtues are the proper disposition or character for human beings to live well with nature. Ch’eng (sincerely, realness, integrity), a classical concept in Chinese philosophy, can be specified as an environmental virtue. Ch’eng is the law of nature and can be regarded as the virtue of nature (cheng zhe tian zhi dao ye). Ch’eng is the requirement for humans to respect and obey nature, is the approach to realize the harmony of human and nature, is the way to be a perfection or integrity person of virtue. Be human of the virtue of ch’eng， one should consummate oneself and nature. That means a person of virtue not only have the virtue of human relationship but also have the virtue of environmental virtue.

This paper presents a narrative on the Ethos of Rice based on the study of the local farming practices in one of the central rice granaries in the Philippines. It tackles the endless debate of the economics of rice production and how it impacts the farm and the farmers’ relation with the land. While it is seen as inevitable and necessary, because rice is the saving grains of the family, their local farming practices and valuation has shown respect to the land that is akin to the land ethic of Leopold. At the same time, the author argues that the aesthetic of the land, which presupposes an ecological conscience and sensitivity to the ‘finer beauty’ of the farm as it becomes the extension of the farmers’ lives, their completeness and fulfillment, may also help facilitate a lasting relationship with land. The appreciation of the its value is therefore a matter of understanding the ecology of the farm and the dynamics of emotions, predilections, valuations, dispositions and the whole breadth of relations that are there. The seasoned farmers of Nueva Ecija have learned this difficult subject of land ethics and aesthetics through their intimate commune with their rice farms, and from there a vision of conservation may be glimpsed.

La philosophie a dû se réinventer chaque fois qu’elle s’est éloignée de sa mission de maintenir la juste balance entre savoir et sophia, entre discours et mode de vie. C’est le cas de la philosophie contemporaine, qui est mise au défi de se réinventer. Constituée comme une réponse aux grands problèmes de notre temps, la philosophie écologique s’est imposée en tant que discours orienté vers l’identification des voies d’une vie fondée sur l’harmonie avec la nature. La contribution de la philosophie écologique à la réinvention de la philosophie contemporaine comme mode de vie fait l’objet de présente communication.

This paper deals with one of the most serious problems that Peruvian people are undergoing, which is not uncommon for the rest of Latin America and, in the long run, for the whole Planet Earth, namely environment pollution. This paper will be presented in four short parts. The first one deals with the justification of the paper. The second one is a report about the income produced by mining in Peru. The third one will present a contrast between the mining zones in Peru and their social reality. Finally, two proposals will be presented that could contribute to make the mining profits in Peru much more just.

Somos responsables de los que todavía no existen, de las formas de vidas que todavía vendrán, de la evolución que estas formas adquirirán, de la existencia futura, pero también de su imposibilidad futura ante las transformaciones a las que sometamos el planeta. Hans Jonas traduce este momento delicado por el que hemos pasado hace décadas cuando, a partir del imperativo categórico de Kant “Obra sólo según una máxima tal que puedas querer al mismo tiempo que se torne ley universal”, enseña que un “imperativo adecuado a la nueva conducta humana y dirigido hacia un nuevo tipo de sujeto actuante se debería expresar de la siguiente forma: ‘Obra de tal modo que los efectos de tu acción sean compatibles con la permanencia de una vida humana auténtica en la Tierra’.”1 Se amplía, por lo tanto, el foco de la ética hacia tiempos lejanos, debiéndose buscar el conocimiento necesario para que se pueda asimilar el hecho de que somos parte integrante de un sistema vivo sorprendentemente rico y bello.

The ancient saying Nosce te ipsum (“Know thyself”), inscribed on the pediment of Apollo’s Temple in Delphi, has been stirring mankind for centuries. Even in the third millennium, who could claim to know themselves or to have understood what human being or his mind is? If human conscious-ness could be explored, the secret of human nature may have the chance to be revealed as well as the human controversial acts. Many philosophers, scien-tists and writers call the human being a genius, a unique creature in the Uni-verse. Indeed, humanity did create a new world, a new civilization on Earth. But philosophers, scientists and writers devote no less attention to the cur-rent environmental and anthropological crises, stating that civilization itself is becoming an increasing threat to people and nature. In this situation, the anthropological issue becomes critical. What the human being is? What are we all? Where did we come from? Where we are going? The great ancient Greek philosopher Socrates would reply, “I know that I know nothing.” In this paper I express the concerns I share especially with two eco-philosophers from the US and Russia, about mankind destroying itself and nature, its own world, for false and unworthy causes.

Η παρούσα ανακοίνωση αναφέρεται στο πλαίσιο ιδεών που κληρονόμησε η περιβαλλοντική εκπαίδευση από την περιβαλλοντική ηθική. Οι ιδέες αυτές προσδιορίζουν τον τρόπο σκέψης και δράσης του ανθρώπου. Η αλλαγή στον τρόπο σκέψης συνίσταται στην ανάγκη για αναθεώρηση του νοήματος της ανάπτυξης και της ευδαιμονίας όπως την εννοεί ο παραδοσιακός βιομηχανικός πολιτισμός. Δηλαδή αυτό που οφείλει να επιδιώκει ο σύγχρονος άνθρωπος είναι η συνολική ευδαιμονία (ψυχολογική, κοινωνική κ.ά.) και όχι η στενή ατομική οικονομική ευμάρεια. Επίσης ζητούμενο είναι η καλλιέργεια της ολιστικής σκέψης αντί της προσκόλλησης στη λογική, ώστε να αναπτυχθούν η σφαιρικότητα και η πληρότητα στη σκέψη. Μέσω της διεπιστημονικότητας, του συνδυασμού των γνώσεων, θα προσεγγίσουμε καλύτερα και σοφότερα το φυσικό περιβάλλον. Η αλλαγή στον τρόπο δράσης προβάλλει την αποφυγή της βίας σε συνδυασμό με την συνεργατική δράση μέσα στα όρια της τοπικής κοινότητας ως αντίδοτο στην κρατική πρωτοκαθεδρία και την παθητικότητα του πολίτη. Τέλος παρατίθενται τα συμπεράσματα, τα οποία αφορούν στο συνολικό μετασχηματισμό της προσωπικότητας στον οποίο συμβάλλουν τα διδάγματα της περιβαλλοντικής εκπαίδευσης.

Η κλιματική αλλαγή, πέραν των ευρύτατων πρακτικών της συνεπειών, αποτελεί μείζον ηθικό ζήτημα το οποίο αφορά τόσο στη λεγόμενη διαγενεακή κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη όσο και στα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, αφού οι όποιες αλλαγές αναμένονται να επηρεάσουν τις μελλοντικές γενιές σε μεγαλύτερο βαθμό από ό, τι επηρεάζουν τις παρούσες. Στόχος του ανά χείρας δοκιμίου είναι η διερεύνηση του κύρους της επίκλησης δικαιωμάτων χάριν των μελλοντικών γενεών, και η εξέταση του βαθμού στον οποίο υφίστανται αντίστοιχα καθήκοντα ή ευθύνες των υπαρχουσών γενεών προς αυτές. Συγκεκριμένα θα υποστηρίξω ότι σε ό, τι τουλάχιστον αφορά στην κλιματική αλλαγή, επίκληση των σχετικών δικαιωμάτων φαίνεται ανυπόστατη και σε κάθε περίπτωση είναι ατελέσφορη.

Η περιβαλλοντική ηθική μελετά την ηθική σχέση των κοινωνικών ομάδων σε σχέση με το περιβάλλον στο οποίο διαβιούν. Μελετά δηλαδή την ηθική θέση των ανθρώπων, προς το περιβάλλον και προς όλα τα όντα και τα στοιχεία τα οποία το αποτελούν. Μέσα στο πλαίσιο αυτό γίνεται ιδιαίτερη συζήτηση για το παλαιό φιλοσοφικό πρόβλημα, ποια είναι η σχέση ανθρώπων και ζώων και αν είναι σωστό να αποδίδουμε στα τελευταία δικαιώματα. Ο Tom Regan, υπέρμαχος των δικαιωμάτων των ζώων, θεωρεί πως η εφαρμογή των ηθικών δικαιωμάτων δεν περιορίζεται μόνο στα έλλογα όντα, αφού ο άνθρωπος θεωρεί φορείς δικαιωμάτων τα βρέφη ή τους νοητικά ανάπηρους. Το κοινό γνώρισμα όλων των όντων που έχουν δικαιώματα, συνεπώς και των ζώων, αποτελεί το γεγονός πως είναι φορείς ζωής που έχει αξία για το κάθε όν και ως υποκείμενα ζωής φέρουν το κεφαλαιώδες δικαίωμα να μην αντιμετωπίζονται ποτέ από τους άλλους μόνο ως μέσον για την επίτευξη οποιωνδήποτε στόχων.

Η σύγχρονη γενετική και οι νευροεπιστήμες τείνουν να υποκαταστήσουν τον ανθρωποκεντρικό κόσμο, με έναν κόσμο μεγαλύτερης βιολογικής πολυπλοκότητας, θέτοντας σε αμφισβήτηση το ανθρώπινο δικαίωμα να νομοθετεί μονομερώς και με σχετικιστική ηθική για τα ζώα και τη φύση. Η δυνατότητα των παράπλευρων διαχειριστικών μηχανισμών πολιτικής να εξομαλύνουν αυτού του είδους τις νομοθεσίες εκπίπτει σταδιακά, καθώς η πολιτική φιλοσοφία παύει να είναι προϋποτιθέμενο υπόβαθρο των οικονομικών συστημάτων. Ως αποτέλεσμα, η αντιμετώπιση του ζώου γίνεται με τρόπο αντιφατικό σε σχέση με την αδήριτη σημερινή ανάγκη να ορίσουμε ξανά τί είναι ένας άνθρωπος.