Whose Anthropocene? A Response
Chakrabarty responds to the contributors of this volume by addressing five issues he considers fundamental to discussions on climate change.
Chakrabarty responds to the contributors of this volume by addressing five issues he considers fundamental to discussions on climate change.
Powerless Science? looks at complex historical, social, and political dynamics, made up of public controversies, environmental and health crises, economic interests, and political responses, and demonstrates how and to what extent scientific knowledge about toxicants has been caught between scientific, economic, and political imperatives.
Managing the Unknown offers essays that show that deficient knowledge is a far more pervasive challenge in resource history than conventional readings suggest. Furthermore, environmental ignorance does not inevitably shrink with the march of scientific progress. This volume combines insights from different continents as well as the seas in between and thus sketches outlines of an emerging global resource history.
This article sketches the contours of the emerging paradigm: a complementary system of traditional and modern methods of water provision, a participatory water resources management and a ‘post-mechanistic’ ethico-religious framework.
After showing that Rolston’s and Callicott’s value theories are fundamentally flawed, the author demonstrates that a value theory grounded in neoclassical, or process, metaphysics avoids the problems in, and incorporates insights from, these accounts.
This article argues that hunting is not a sport, but a neo-traditional cultural trophic practice consistent with ecological ethics, including a meliorist concern for animal rights or welfare.
The author’s aim in this paper is to show, by means of a phenomenological investigation, that the “scepticism regarding animal minds” presupposes an implausible account of how we relate to others, both humnan and nonhuman.
In this article the author poses the question whether rationality can be the reason why humans deserve moral consideration and animals do not.
The paper highlights shortcomings in GMO public consultation practices in the European Union and in one of its member countries, Finland. Specifically, they do not serve democracy, increase consensus, enable better decisions to be made, or establish trust.
The paper “Evaluating the ‘Ethical Matrix’ as a Radioactive Waste Management Deliberative Decision-Support Tool” by Matthew Cotton outlines the strengths and limitations of the matrix as well as a framework for the development of alternative tools to better satisfy the needs of ethical assessment in radioactive waste management decision-making processes.