Anthropocentrism (Environmental Ethics)

Просмотров 23 тыс.

% 368

Support me on Patreon www.patreon.com/aljosatoplak/
This short series of lectures present the different philosophical positions about what ethical commitments we truly have to the environment. In this video, we look at the human-centered view, also called Anthropocentrism, according to which the environment matters, because it has effects on humans.
Environmental Ethics playlist: bit.ly/3hIYL6F
If you want to support me, fuel me with green tea: 💲 www.paypal.me/bebeflapula 💲
📚 Some literature:
Immanuel, Kant (1775~80). Of Duties towards Animals and Spirit.
Singer, Peter (1975). Animal Liberation.
Pope Francis (2015). Praise be to you, my Lord.
Onora O'Neill (1997). On Enivonmental Values, Anthropocentrism and Speciecism.
⏰ Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
1:20 History: Aristotle
2:21 History: Descartes
3:27 History: Kant
4:38 History: Christianity
6:10 Contemporary Anthropocentrism
7:34 Critiques of Anthropocentrism
8:32 Outro

Опубликовано:

2 янв 2022

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 57

@benross9174 2 года назад

Thanks for the content! It is really cool that your channel is both a place for memes and more serious videos/presentations as well

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

Thanks a lot, sometimes I worry people wouldn't like that inconsistency 😅

@RealEstateWithHnJ Год назад

I'm a student teacher teaching Philosophy, environmental ethics would be our lesson tomorrow and here I am learning about it from you sir!

@puunk_9240 2 года назад

Environmental Ethics are the most important and demanding of applications for ethical frameworks and beliefs, such a raw intersection of short term and long term values that never takes a backseat.

@stan2429 2 года назад

4:12 "The logic being that if you could be cruel towards an animal you could also be cruel towards a human". Well the Nazi regime went 180 on that, they banned vivisection on animals with in a few months of getting into power, and didn't extend such kindness for humans obviously, the punishment for the crime was to be sent to a concentration camp. Good video.

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

I had no idea, I've just read the wikipedia article on Animal welfare in Nazi Germany, quite mind boggling. maybe I'll consider a future series on the history of the animal question, then I'd properly research things like that, because that's really interesting!

@guitarinteract Год назад

Maybe it was the “ism” part. Isms tend to make humans myopic to the intersectionality of values and compassion. Cult leaders tend to do this expertly as we see in the Trumpian effect.

@amjionaman8889 Год назад

happy to hear you read every comments. its really helpful btw

@eeriestmoss5544 11 месяцев назад

Thanks for the in depth and current explanation. Our current anthropocentric way of doing things strikes me as woefully unsustainable. It scares me that these conversations aren't more mainstream, it scares me that no discipline can truly be said to be decoupled from anthropic myopia, climate change scares me, and so do the 200 species which will go extinct today. Sorry for the doom & gloom... have a nice day everyone :)

@sailforethicss4e821 4 месяца назад

Don't be scared, it is only an information about the limits we, as human specie are facing ! Open to artist view, natural continuity in the long term!

@anushanotes 2 года назад

Great content, Alyosh! Waiting for the other two, to decide where I stand on this matter.

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

Thank you Anusha, happy to see you stick around :)

@guitarinteract Год назад

Where we stand has already been determined. It’s only a matter of awareness.

@randallwhite8124 Год назад

Glad to see videos being made on this topic... I have a feeling we will find it only to increase in pertinence in the coming years.

@Rakudajin 2 года назад

I think it is impossible to completely exclude anthropocentrism - even when we try a different perspective, we are heavily influenced if not bound by our human existence. But I do see it very valuable to nevertheless try to breach it.

@gavine2363 Год назад

Yeah, ofc we have to care for our own species, people, family, and self. the problem is when someone sees humans as being separate and above the rest of life. We depend on a healthy biosphere more than the biosphere relies on us like how an individual relies more on a functioning civilization than the civilization relies on tht individual

@guitarinteract Год назад

It is the “ism” that makes it an existential threat as we reach the disastrous end of the species by humanities lack of cosmic intelligence. The development of a large brain and thumbs led us to believe we were superior, but Gaia and God have other ideas for our unique make up.

@remotefaith 3 месяца назад

@@gavine2363 Unless you are arguing for yourself and other humans to live on the same level as animals, that is open to the ravages and immense suffering of the natural world, then you too believe that humans are more important than the rest of the biosphere.

@gavine2363 3 месяца назад

@@remotefaith Im not following

@SSanti 7 месяцев назад

great video

@clairejacoby3808 9 месяцев назад

Great video🎉

@beritschiltz6412 9 месяцев назад

such a good video👍🏼👍🏼

@jgjz1585 Год назад

If we don`t take care of the thing we need soon we will have nothing

@jonathanboram7858 2 года назад

Have you read any Timothy Morton? His book Hyperobjects has a radically different take on the environment from anything I've seen elsewhere. It's informed by Object Oriented Ontology, and I'm not totally sold on everything there, but it provides an incredibly fresh and unique way of looking at environmental issues.

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

Thank you for the recommendation, given my renewed interest in ontology I might give it a go.

@guitarinteract Год назад

This is the story that I have been pondering in my soul, my heart and my mind as a Christ adherent. I have been saying “how we treat animals is also how we treat humans”. I feel my faith at its core is not fixed merely by a creed, but through experience in the mystical body of the person we call Jesus or Christ. I feel that if our creed is to express a totality of belief it must include all sentient beings and Gaia as living conscious organisms worthy of being redeemed and saved just as the human soul is so highly considered by our creed.

@user-Jfjd638bdj82 9 месяцев назад

Hahaha actually religions have given humans green light to overexploit biosphere. Because God has created animals and plants for humans to kill, eat, exploit, use. Thanks to Abrahamic religions we have the 6th mass extinction. And I'm Muslim.

@user-xr4bo3ln6f 2 года назад

Hi, like your content ! although the video is about environmental ethic , and I guess in the general manner of view towards the environment. I would like to indulge in the following aspect: what would be the transhumanist ethics on the environment while being part of the anthropocentric wing? By anthropocentric wing, I mean the transhumanism that sees as the human aspect to be the core form ans the transcendent part would be the enhancement of human characteristics without diverting from them. Although one could argue about the morphological freedom which plays a big role in transhumanism as a aspect that contradicts the anthropocentric view, but I would like to see the case if it doesn't contradict before shifting to that topic Thank you 😊

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

I'm sorry, there are some grammatical errors in your comment, so I'm not entirely sure whether I'll truly answer what you were asking me about, but I think that an anthropocentrist can be a bioconservatist, which means he'll value all measures to protect the equilibirum of nature, since our wellfare depends on it, while transhumanists would be those anthropocentrists who believe that (1) we should rely on- and use tecnology to restore nature, and (2) if one day we'll be able to create a better atrificial environment, then we should go for it. Of course, things are not that clear-cut, but the point is that there seems to be some tension between bioconservatism and transhumanism, that is, more tension that there is between bioconservatism and anthropocentrism in general.

@user-xr4bo3ln6f 2 года назад

@@Bebeflapula hello again, sorry for the broken grammar, but I'm glad you got the question. I agree with your answer, and the tension between transhumanism and biocomservativism heightens at subtopics like geo-engineering. Thank you for your answer))

@louisnooope 2 года назад

just by participating in the debate, no matter which of the three position you say you hold, you are actually still defending antropocentrism. all positions rely of humanity itself to even be considered..

@gavine2363 Год назад

I mean yeah: altruism is a hoax, all animals are selfish. Anthropocentrism is still a delusion tho bc it states humans are more important than life. But yeah, when people are killing the Earth, most people are concerned we’ll make an environment tht can’t sustain human life

@guitarinteract Год назад

I agree that a big brain and a thump give us unique power, but the consciousness of the universe and our mother Gaia and nature itself actually bring us down to size. We can preserve our unique attributes if put to service more as caregivers than rulers.

@jade_is_tired 8 месяцев назад

Your argument relies on a mischaracterization of anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric ethics. Anthropocentrism's defining assertion is that the morality of an action is determined only by how it affects humans; it's entirely possible to argue against that as a human. You're talking about moral agency, while anthropecentrism is about moral patienthood.

@ASradhikavlogs20 Месяц назад

Okay thank tomorrow I am going to give exam let's see what happened

@pokeguyximumsword-xb6rk Год назад

I find anthopocentrism unconvincing. Being something of an outlier in these sorts of spectrums ( let's say "Anthro" left "Bio" right side) I might take it a step further right.

@pokeguyximumsword-xb6rk Год назад

After watching the other two videos I thought some update was warranted. So as for the above "further step tithe right" there is one, but first I must disagree with something. That something being how a perceived implication that biocentrism would preclude eating red meat. I'll explain, it seems to me the meat industry done wholly differently would be morally sound from any reasonable perspective. I guess what I'm proposing as we enter biocentrism we seek symbiotic relationships practice sustainable consumption but still seek the stars so to speak. Cheers!

@ultimateforme1608 2 года назад

I’m religious and I find weak anthropocentrism to be my position. I think giving humans some moral superiority is natural and instinctual even without religion, and I think giving humans TOTAL moral superiority would be selfish and immoral. I find weak anthropocentrism to be an adequate middle ground between instincts and control of said instincts.

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

I've read a wonderful book by a catholic theologian, who stricly from biblical propositions deduces the imperative that we must reject the meat industry, as well as the fur industy, animal experimentation and sport hunting. I've found that quite surprising. Somehow, just like Peter Singer when he first published his Animal Liberation in 1975, I thought that mainstream catholicism would be incompatible with such care for animal welfare, even "weak anthropocentrism". Sadly, the forementioned book is only avaliable in german and italian (it's called "Der Mensch und das liebe Vieh" by Martin Lintner), but I'm sure there's plenty of theologians making a case like that. There's also Saint Francis of Assisi, going for a really really weak anthropocentrism.

@ultimateforme1608 2 года назад

@@Bebeflapula that is really interesting. I’m Muslim so I can provide insight into our views. Animal slaughter is well documented and is given some significance, at the same time there are 2 anecdotes I’d like to share with you that take an almost opposite view. The first is about a woman who is prophesied to go to hell for caging a cat and not caring for it, the other is about a man who lowers his boot into a well to quench the thirst of a dog and is promised heaven. So similar to the Catholics, there seems to be a middle ground including human superiority but rejecting animal cruelty and instead advocating for mercy towards them.

@gavine2363 Год назад

@@ultimateforme1608 I like this very much. Thank you for sharing. It’s my belief we have a responsibility, as aware humans, to care for the life we affect like our animal companions we love so dearly

@Eekohtainment 2 года назад

I made a video about a similar controversial topic on my channel. Almost like a reply to this video.

@pneumonoultramicroscopicsi4736 Год назад

Dude your accent is tough to understand ngl without subtitles

@honour82 Год назад

Humans have moral standing over animals because we have free-will. We do not judge lions for decapiting the cubs of a lioness that are not his when he joins a pride. We do not judge the gazelle for leaving her newborn baby behind if it fails to stand and run with the herd-- within minutes of its birth. We don't judge our dogs for licking their genitals right in front of us. Moral standing is given to us because we have free-will and the capacity to discern and make decisions-- not just run on instinct and appetite alone. As a human being, I have the power to transcend my humanity to near divine status. But I can also commit depraved actions that compromise my humanity-- making me less than an animal. This is it. Simply put-- this is why I believe environmental ethics must be human-centered-- because it is we who can use reason (even flawed reason) to make these decisions-- and we have the capacity to appreciate the consequences of our actions.

@guitarinteract Год назад

All good points. As humans however it would serve us and nature best to put our unique powers into service to nature and the great equalizer cosmic consciousness through the truly more powerful Gaia and the great I Am.

@gavine2363 3 месяца назад

Humans have moral standing cause we’re humans. Free will isn’t all tht unique. Agreeing with guitarinteract, We stand more to gain from caring for nature as it nurtures all

@pollie1342 2 года назад

and ecocentrism is too stupid to cover?

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

Usually it's taken as a type of biocentrism, hence I mention it in the third video, although I admit my understanding of it is not as tangible as it should've been.

@pollie1342 2 года назад

@@Bebeflapula I think ecocentrists somehow believe there can be value inherent in objects... which is just epistemelogical suicide I think. good video by the way :)

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

@@pollie1342 Yes, there's something to it, this point has also been put forward by the anthropocentrist Onora O'Neill, whose paper I included in the video description. I'm not sure, but at least it seems to me that the point stands only as long as you take ethics to be grounded in (objective) moral facts. Ecocentrists such as Aldo Leopold, for example, seem to base their views wholly in subjective experience (if I understood them correctly). I also think that you can be both a relativist and ecocentrist, hence you can say that all life-forms have inherent value, but that value does not "exist" anywhere, it's just a concept that, following certain arguments, we chose to accept.

@Bebeflapula 2 года назад

@@pollie1342 Also, thanks for starting the discussion :)

@urdreamBB Год назад

r uu israeli?

@user-Jfjd638bdj82 9 месяцев назад

Are you a neonazi?

@anaisf718 Год назад

I have to write an essay about this and I was trying to get another explanation on anthropocentrism because I seriously can't follow Erica Fudge's train of thought in "Animal" 🥲 this helped a lot thanks!