agriculturalethicsacomparativeperspective

agriculturalethicsacomparativeperspective内容摘要：

es. Farming is the way human beings justly occupy a place in the divine (that is, natural) order… Agriculture is thus the singular practice by which humanity makes its way in the world in a pious and morally just manner.” (Thompson, 2020, p. 3637) Possible Inadequacies of Thompson‟s Agrarianism (1)  i) Certain aspects of Greek philosophy that are favorable to his agrarian position are highlighted, but some salient aspects of Greek philosophy that may have some internal tensions with this agrarian position are not addressed, such as: a) The dualistic view of human nature: a person is posed of two distinct kinds of entity: body and soul b) The atomistic view of nature: the universe is particulate, reductive, material, inert, quantitative, and mechanical  Human beings are both essentially and ethically segregated from nature in this Greek worldview (Callicott, 1987, p. 118).  Human beings seek not unity with nature but conquest in this Greek worldview (McHarg, 1969) Possible Inadequacies of Thompson‟s Agrarianism (2)  How are we to make sense of Hesiod‟s idea that Zeus—a sacred being—is thoroughly integrated into nature? Is this idea a merely metaphorical or poetic expression, or something to be taken seriously—that it has some real ontological import?  If the former were the case, we would have difficulty taking a sacred worldview seriously. If the latter were the case, there would seem to be a direct conflict between a sacred view of nature expressed by Hesiod and a mechanistic and atomistic view of nature popular among ancient Greek philosophers. The JudeoChristian View of Man and Nature: Congruent with Greek Philosophy but Leads to Environmental Crisis  1. God—the locus of the holy or sacred—transcends nature.  2. Nature I a profane artifact of a divine, craftsmanlike creator. The essence of the natural world is informed matter: God divided and ordered an inert, plastic material.  3. Man exclusively is created in the image of God and thus is segregated, essentially, from the rest of nature.  4. Man is given dominion by God over nature.  5. God mands man to subdue nature and multiply himself.  6. The whole metaphysical structure of the JudeoChristian world view is political and hierarchical: God over Man, Man over Nature—which results in a moral pecking order or power structure.  7. The imageofGod in Man is the ground of man‟s intrinsic value. Since nonhuman natural entities lack the divine image, they are morally disenfranchised. They have, at best, instrumental value.  8. This notion is pounded in the latter JudeoChristian tradition by AristotelianThomistic teleology—rational life is the telos of nature and hence all the rest of nature exists as a means—a support system—for rational men.  (Callicott, 1987。 Lynn White, Science 1967) Fundamental Questions in Environmental Ethics  1) What is the nature of nature?  2) What is the nature of man?  3) How should man relate to nature? (Ip, 1983。 Callicott, 1987) Suitably answering these questions remains critical for developing a substantial version of Thompsonian agrarianism Zhuangzi‟s Philosophy: The Nature of Man and Nature Understanding the nature of nature is inseparable from understanding the nature of man. The nature of man can be viewed from three angles: a) Body b) Person (psychological relation R: Parfit) c) Self Details of my reading Zhuangzi on the above issues: Cheng (forthing): “Self and the Dream of the Butterfly in the Zhuangzi”, Philosophy East。