Anthropocentrism, Biocentrism, Ecocentrism (1)

Martin Lintner

The Philosophical-Theological College of Brixen/Bressanone, Italy
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9950-4804

Abstract

The matter of anthropocentrism, biocentrism and ecocentrism are different worldview and ethics models. There are philosophical positions, which express the self-understanding of man in relation to the non-human beings and nature, and which are relevant for the ethics, especially for the ethics of animals, ethics of environment and bioethics. It is about the question of who and what belong to the space of morality. The answer to this question in the mentioned positions is formulated either narrowly or widely. The presented article presents in details different
models and positions in the field of ethics of environment.

Keywords:

Anthropozentrismus, Biozentrismus, Ökozentrismus

Baranzke Heike. 1995. „Lynn White und das dominium terrae (Gen 1,28b). Ein Beitrag zu einer doppelten Wirkungsgeschichte”. Biblische Notizen (76) : 32–61.
  Google Scholar

Bartolommei S. 1991. “L’“etica della terra” di Aldo Leopold”. Global Bioethics 3 (10) : 61–70.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/11287462.1990.10800555   Google Scholar

Basaglia Federica. 2016. “La ricezione dell’argomento kantiano per i doveri indiretti relativi agli animali nel dibattito contemporaneo”. I Castelli di Yale IV (2) : 15–41.
  Google Scholar

Brumbaugh Robert S. 1978. Of Man, Animals, and Morals: A Brief History. In On the Fifth Day. Animal Rights & Human Ethics. Hg. Richard K. Morris, Michael W. Fox, 6–25. Washington: Acropolis Books.
  Google Scholar

Callicott John Baird. 1984. “Non-Anthropocentric Value Theory and Environmental Ethics”. American Philosophy Quarterly (21) : 299–309.
  Google Scholar

Chiodi Maurizio. 2014. Teologia morale fondamentale (Nuovo corso di teologia morale 1), Brescia: Queriniana.
  Google Scholar

d’Eaubonne Françoise. 1974. Le Féminisme Ou La Mort. Paris: Horay.
  Google Scholar

Darpö Jan. 2021. Can Nature get it Right? A Study on Rights of Nature in the European Context. Study requested by the JURI committee. Brussels.
  Google Scholar

Fuchs Marie-Christine, Theisen Levon. 2021. “La naturaleza como sujeto de derecho”. Análisis y argumentos (443) : 1–10.
  Google Scholar

Horstmann Ulrich. 1983. Das Untier. Konturen einer Philosophie der Menschenflucht. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
  Google Scholar

Jeremy Bentham. 1789. Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. London (trad. it.: Id. 1998. Introduzione ai principi della morale e della legislazione. Torino: UTET).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00077240   Google Scholar

Jonas Hans. 1979. Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp (trad. it.: Id. 2002. Il principio responsabilità. Un’etica per la civiltà tecnologica. Bologna: Biblioteca Einaudi).
  Google Scholar

Korff Wilhelm. 1998. Einführung in das Projekt Bioethik. In Lexikon der Bioethik 1, 5–14.
  Google Scholar

Korsgaard Christine M. 2018. Fellow Creatures: Our Obligations to the Other Animals. Oxford: University Press.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198753858.003.0008   Google Scholar

Krebs Angelika. 1997. Naturethik im Überblick. In Naturethik: Grundtexte der gegenwärtigen tier und ökoethischen Diskussion. Hg. Angelika Krebs, 337–379. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
  Google Scholar

Krolzik Udo. 1979. Umweltkrise, Folge des Christentums, Stuttgart: Kreuz Verlag.
  Google Scholar

Leopold Aldo. 1949. A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There. London: Oxford University Press.
  Google Scholar

Martin M. Lintner. 1997. Der Mensch und das liebe Vieh. Ethische Fragen im Umgang mit Tieren. Innsbruck: Tyrolia.
  Google Scholar

Lovelock James, Sagan Lynn. 1974. “Atmospheric homeostasis by and for the biosphere: the Gaia hypothesis”. Tellus 26 (1–2) : 2–10.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1974.tb01946.x   Google Scholar

Moltmann Jürgen. 1986. Dio nella creazione. Dottrina teologica nella creazione. Brescia: Queriniana.
  Google Scholar

Münk Hans J. 1987. „Umweltkrise – Folge und Erbe des Christentums?“. Jahrbuch für Sozialwissenschaft (28) : 133–206.
  Google Scholar

Münk Hans J. 1995. Umweltverantwortung und christliche Theologie. Forschungsbericht zu neuen deutschsprachigen Beiträgen im Blick auf eine umweltethische Grundkonzeption. In Brennpunkt Sozialethik. Theorien, Aufgaben, Methoden. Hg. Marianne Heimbach-Steins u.a., 385–402. Freiburg – Basel – Wien: Herder.
  Google Scholar

Münk Hans J. 2013. Welchen moralischen Status für Pflanzen? In Wo steht die Umweltethik? Argumentationsmuster im Wandel. Hg. Markus Vogt u.a., 165–186. Marburg: Metropolis.
  Google Scholar

Næss Arne Dekke Eide u.a. 2005. Deep ecology of wisdom. Explorations in unities of nature and cultures, selected papers. Dordrecht: Springer.
  Google Scholar

Næss Arne Dekke Eide. 1973. “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. A Summary”. Inquiry (16) : 95–100.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00201747308601682   Google Scholar

Nussbaum Martha C. 2006. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge: Harvard University Press (trad. it.: Id. 2007. Le nuove frontiere della giustizia. Disabilità, nazionalità, appartenenza di specie. Bologna: Il Mulino).
  Google Scholar

Odparlik Sabine. 2014. Die Würde der Pflanze. Ein sinnvolles ethisches Prinzip im Kontext der Grünen Gentechnik? Baden Baden: Alber.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/9783495860052   Google Scholar

Paola Marcello Di, Pellegrino Gianfranco. 2019. Etica e politica delle piante. Bologna: Derive Approdi.
  Google Scholar

Plumwood Val. 1993. Feminism and the mastery of nature. London – New York: Routledge.
  Google Scholar

Radford Ruether Rosemary. 1992. Gaia & God. An Ecofeminist Theology of Earth Healing. New York: Harper Collings (trad. it.: Id. 1995. Gaia e Dio. Una teologia ecofemminista per la guarigione della Terra. Brescia: Queriniana).
  Google Scholar

Regan Tom. 1983. The case for animal rights. Berkeley: University of California Press (trad. it: Id. 1990. I diritti animali. Milano: Garzanti).
  Google Scholar

Ricken Friedo. 1987. „Anthropozentrismus oder Biozentrismus? Begründungsprobleme der ökologischen Ethik“. Theologie und Philosophie (62) : 1–21.
  Google Scholar

Rosenberger Michael. 2015. Der Traum vom Frieden zwischen Mensch und Tier. München: Kösel.
  Google Scholar

Ryder Richard D. 2010. “Speciesism”. Critical Society (2) : 1–2.
  Google Scholar

Santamaría-Dávila Jordi u.a. 2019. “Women’s Ecofeminist Spirituality: Origins and Applications to Psychotherapy”. Explore 15 (1) : 55–60.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2018.05.004   Google Scholar

Schockenhoff Eberhard. 1997. Etica della vita. Un compendio teologico. Brescia: Queriniana.
  Google Scholar

Schockenhoff Eberhard. 20132. Ethik des Lebens. Grundlagen und neue Herausforderungen. Freiburg – Basel – Wien: Herder.
  Google Scholar

Schweitzer Albert. 1957. Rispetto per la vita. Milano: Edizioni di Comunità.
  Google Scholar

Shiva Vandana. 1989. Staying Alive. Women, Ecology and Development. London: Zed Books.
  Google Scholar

Shiva Vandana, Mies Maria. 1993, Ecofeminism. London: Zed Books.
  Google Scholar

Singer Peter. 1975. Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals. New York: Harper
  Google Scholar

Collins (trad. it.: Id. 2009. Liberazione animale. Il manifesto di un movimento diffuso in tutto il mondo. Milano: Il Saggiatore).
  Google Scholar

Taylor Paul W. 1981. “The Ethics of Respect for Nature”. Environmental Ethics (3) : 197–218.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics19813321   Google Scholar

Taylor Paul W. 1986. Respect for nature. A theory of environmental ethics. Princeton – New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  Google Scholar


Published
2023-12-28

Cited by

Lintner, M. (2023). Anthropocentrism, Biocentrism, Ecocentrism (1). Studia Teologiczno-Historyczne Śląska Opolskiego, 43(2), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.25167/sth.5278

Authors

Martin Lintner 
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9950-4804

Professor of Moral Theology at the Philosophical-Theological High School Brixen/Bressanone, Italy.



Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.


License

Copyright (c) 2023 Studia Teologiczno-Historyczne Śląska Opolskiego

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Licencja oraz prawa autorskie autorzy przekazują wydawcy, którym jest Redakcji Wydawnictw WT UO.