J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics
This article analyzes the ideas of American philosopher J. Baird Callicott to shed light on ecological thinking and its inherent commitment to change and the adaptation of US environmental ethics. Callicott is one of the most prominent and longest-serving practitioners of environmental ethics; he is...
Đã lưu trong:
| Xuất bản năm: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/angles, |
|---|---|
| Tác giả chính: | |
| Định dạng: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Ngôn ngữ: | Anglais |
| Được phát hành: |
Angles
2020
|
| Những chủ đề: | |
| Truy cập trực tuyến: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| id |
openedition-oai:revues.org:angles_1390 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
openedition |
| collection |
OpenEdition Journal |
| language |
Anglais |
| format |
Article ou chapitre numérique |
| building |
0/Bibliothèque numérique/ 1/Bibliothèque numérique/OpenEdition Journals/ |
| topic |
Callicot J. Baird éthique de l’environnement éthique du vivant écocentrisme anthropocentrisme écologie Callicot J. Baird environmental ethics land ethic ecocentrism anthropocentrism ecology |
| spellingShingle |
Callicot J. Baird éthique de l’environnement éthique du vivant écocentrisme anthropocentrisme écologie Callicot J. Baird environmental ethics land ethic ecocentrism anthropocentrism ecology Collomb, Jean-Daniel J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics |
| description |
This article analyzes the ideas of American philosopher J. Baird Callicott to shed light on ecological thinking and its inherent commitment to change and the adaptation of US environmental ethics. Callicott is one of the most prominent and longest-serving practitioners of environmental ethics; he is especially known for his support of land ethic, as defined by Aldo Leopold, and ecocentrism, an ethic predicated on the perception of ecosystems as communities. Callicott draws on the works of David Hume, Adam Smith and Charles Darwin to justify a Leopoldian ecocentrism. Extending Hume’s and Smith’s theory of moral sentiments to non-human life and ecosystems, Callicott claims to have continued Darwin’s ethical reflections in The Descent of Man (1871), also taken up by Aldo Leopold after his conversion to the ecological worldview. Callicott argues that the meaning of community can and must be protean, in order to ensure that environmental destruction will not continue unimpeded. Callicott thus calls for a major paradigm shift away from modernity, as defined by the scientific revolution of the 17th century, to a reconstructive postmodernity informed by Darwinism, ecology and the “new” physics spawned by quantum theory. According to Callicott, the only effective way to transcend Cartesian dualism is to bring about a major change in people’s worldview. Short of such a shift in paradigms, the dualities at the root of the environmental crisis will persist. Ironically, one of the main challenges to Callicott’s defense of the land ethic came from within ecology, from what Donald Worster calls the ecology of chaos. If Callicott rescues Leopold’s land ethic from ecological insignificance, this is because of the advent of disturbance ecology in the 1970s and 1980s along with the gradual replacement of the balance-of-nature paradigm by the nature-in-flux paradigm. How can ecosystems be considered communities if they are subject to stochastic and catastrophic change? Distinguishing the scale of non-human change and anthropogenic change, Callicott salvages an ethic whose ecological foundations are precarious and unstable. In doing so, he demonstrates that just as adaptation is part of a natural evolution, it is also the key to intellectual and philosophical evolution. Callicott’s response to disturbance ecology nevertheless highlights the precarious position of environmental philosophers who predicate their moral prescriptions on scientific knowledge, given that the science of ecology is always evolving. |
| author |
Collomb, Jean-Daniel |
| author_facet |
Collomb, Jean-Daniel |
| author_sort |
Collomb, Jean-Daniel |
| title |
J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics |
| title_short |
J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics |
| title_full |
J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics |
| title_fullStr |
J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics |
| title_full_unstemmed |
J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics |
| title_sort |
j. baird callicott, science, and the unstable foundation of environmental ethics |
| publisher |
Angles |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| container_title |
URI:https://journals.openedition.org/angles |
| url |
https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://doi.org/10.4000/angles.1390 https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://journals.openedition.org/angles/1390 |
| _version_ |
1877293948390604800 |
| spelling |
openedition-oai:revues.org:angles_1390 https://doi.org/10.4000/angles.1390 urn:doi:10.4000/angles.1390 en https://journals.openedition.org/angles/1390 2020-07-16T02:00:00Z info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess article info:eu-repo/semantics/article urn:handle:20.500.13089/9mzw https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ J. Baird Callicott, Science, and the Unstable Foundation of Environmental Ethics Angles Société des Anglicistes de l'Enseignement Supérieur info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/2274-2042 URI:https://journals.openedition.org/angles Collomb, Jean-Daniel Callicot J. Baird éthique de l’environnement éthique du vivant écocentrisme anthropocentrisme écologie Callicot J. Baird environmental ethics land ethic ecocentrism anthropocentrism ecology This article analyzes the ideas of American philosopher J. Baird Callicott to shed light on ecological thinking and its inherent commitment to change and the adaptation of US environmental ethics. Callicott is one of the most prominent and longest-serving practitioners of environmental ethics; he is especially known for his support of land ethic, as defined by Aldo Leopold, and ecocentrism, an ethic predicated on the perception of ecosystems as communities. Callicott draws on the works of David Hume, Adam Smith and Charles Darwin to justify a Leopoldian ecocentrism. Extending Hume’s and Smith’s theory of moral sentiments to non-human life and ecosystems, Callicott claims to have continued Darwin’s ethical reflections in The Descent of Man (1871), also taken up by Aldo Leopold after his conversion to the ecological worldview. Callicott argues that the meaning of community can and must be protean, in order to ensure that environmental destruction will not continue unimpeded. Callicott thus calls for a major paradigm shift away from modernity, as defined by the scientific revolution of the 17th century, to a reconstructive postmodernity informed by Darwinism, ecology and the “new” physics spawned by quantum theory. According to Callicott, the only effective way to transcend Cartesian dualism is to bring about a major change in people’s worldview. Short of such a shift in paradigms, the dualities at the root of the environmental crisis will persist. Ironically, one of the main challenges to Callicott’s defense of the land ethic came from within ecology, from what Donald Worster calls the ecology of chaos. If Callicott rescues Leopold’s land ethic from ecological insignificance, this is because of the advent of disturbance ecology in the 1970s and 1980s along with the gradual replacement of the balance-of-nature paradigm by the nature-in-flux paradigm. How can ecosystems be considered communities if they are subject to stochastic and catastrophic change? Distinguishing the scale of non-human change and anthropogenic change, Callicott salvages an ethic whose ecological foundations are precarious and unstable. In doing so, he demonstrates that just as adaptation is part of a natural evolution, it is also the key to intellectual and philosophical evolution. Callicott’s response to disturbance ecology nevertheless highlights the precarious position of environmental philosophers who predicate their moral prescriptions on scientific knowledge, given that the science of ecology is always evolving. Cet article vise à éclairer l’influence de la pensée écologique, et tout particulièrement de notions telles que le changement et la mutation, sur l’éthique environnementale aux États-Unis en analysant l’œuvre de J. Baird Callicott, aujourd’hui l’un des philosophes de l’environnement les plus influents outre-Atlantique. Callicott a dédié une part considérable de sa carrière à la mise en avant de l’éthique du vivant (land ethic) créée par Aldo Leopold au milieu du 20e siècle. Afin de donner ses lettres de noblesse philosophiques à la proposition éthique de Leopold, Callicott s’appuie notamment sur David Hume, Adam Smith et Charles Darwin : en appliquant aux écosystèmes et aux espèces non-humaines les théories des sentiments moraux de Hume et de Smith, Callicott affirme ne faire que poursuivre un processus commencé par Darwin dans La Filiation de l’homme et développé par Aldo Leopold dans son Almanach d’un comté des sables. Selon Callicott, l’élargissement du sens que l’espèce humaine confère aux liens communautaires est une nécessité impérieuse face à la multiplication des défis environnementaux. Callicott en vient à préconiser l’avènement d’un changement de paradigme, qui devra conduire l’humanité à adhérer à une « modernité déconstructrice » informée par le darwinisme, la science écologique et l’apport de la physique quantique. Callicott espère que cette transition conduira au remplacement du dualisme cartésien entre l’espèce humaine et la nature par une vision écocentriste du monde en vertu de laquelle l’espèce humaine se conçoit comme intégrée au vivant et non comme radicalement différente de lui. Pourtant, c’est la science écologique elle-même qui fragilise le plus les propositions éthiques de Callicott à travers l’apparition, à la fin des années 1970, de ce que l’historien Donald Worster a appelé l’écologie du chaos. L’attention grandissante que les écologues apportent alors aux perturbations et à l’instabilité du vivant contraint le philosophe à faire évoluer l’éthique léopoldienne en insistant sur le caractère discriminant de l’échelle des perturbations : par la rapidité et l’ampleur des dégâts qu’elles provoquent, certaines perturbations d’origine anthropique ne sont pas moralement acceptables. Le parcours philosophique de Callicott démontre ainsi l’importance de la capacité d’adaptation dans l’évolution intellectuelle et philosophique. Mais il souligne aussi la situation précaire des philosophes de l’environnement qui fondent leurs prescriptions morales sur des savoirs scientifiques. Ces savoirs jouissent d’un grand prestige depuis la révolution scientifique mais ils sont par nature toujours susceptibles d’évoluer. |