Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
In This Section

SATS

Northern European Journal of Philosophy

Editor-in-Chief: Addis, Mark / Hämäläinen, Nora / Pedersen, Esther Oluffa / Westphal, Kenneth R.

Ed. by Haraldsson, Robert H. / Letteval, Rebecka / Serck-Hanssen, Camilla / Timmermann, Jens / Verbeek, Peter-Paul / Wallgren, Thomas / Westerkamp, Dirk

Editorial Board Member: Sondergaard Christensen, Anne-Marie / Gimmler, Antje / Granberg, Anne / Gundersen, Lars Bo / Gustafsson, Martin / Heinämaa, Sara / Hutto, Daniel / Janvid, Mikael / Kappel, Klemens / Laitinen, Arto / Linnebo, Oystein / Nilsson, Jonas / Riis, Sören / Rödl, Sebastian / Thorgeirsdottir, Sigridur / Tuinen, Sjoerd / Wienand, Isabelle / Ylikoski, Petri / Zahavi, Dan

2 Issues per year


CiteScore 2016: 0.15

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.141
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.312

Online
ISSN
1869-7577
See all formats and pricing
In This Section

Anthropocentrism versus Ecocentrism Revisited: Theoretical Confusions and Practical Conclusions

Teea Kortetmäki
  • Corresponding author
  • University of Jyväskylä, Finland
  • Email:
Published Online: 2013-11-05 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sats-2013-0002

Abstract

One of the hardest questions in environmental philosophy is the debate between anthropocentric and ecocentric accounts of value. I argue that a great deal of the disagreement in this debate arises from a) misunderstanding of the concepts used in the debate and b) unfruitful reading of vaguely framed arguments. The conceptual and argumentative analysis of the debate shows that many arguments can be ignored as they either contain conceptual confusion or concern issues that are actually irrelevant to the centrism division. However, there are arguments that maintain their relevance, and these arguments have important consequences on the practical environmental ethics. Hence, contrary to Bryan G. Norton’s optimism about the “centrism convergence” on the level of practical environmentalism, I contend that disagreements prevail even in practice. As a solution, I suggest that the centrism debaters should focus on the practical level and work to find space for agreement.

Keywords: anthropocentrism; deep ecology; ecocentrism; environmental philosophy; intrinsic value

    About the article

    Published Online: 2013-11-05

    Published in Print: 2013-11-01


    Citation Information: SATS, ISSN (Online) 1869-7577, ISSN (Print) 1600-1974, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sats-2013-0002.

    Export Citation

    © 2013 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.. Copyright Clearance Center

    Citing Articles

    Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

    [1]
    Jesper Sjöström, Ingo Eilks, and Vânia G. Zuin
    Science & Education, 2016

    Comments (0)

    Please log in or register to comment.
    Log in