anthropocentrism

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的paper代写范文- The anthropocentrism，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了人类中心主义。人类中心主义是所有生态危机的思想根源。人类中心主义把人类的利益作为价值原点和道德评价的依据，认为人类是唯一拥有内在价值的生命体，因此人类的利益远比环境和非人类的动植物重要。这种认知让人类把自己的利益凌驾于自然之上，为了追求物质生活的最大舒适度，肆意地破坏大自然，破坏生态环境，成为如今生态危机的罪魁祸首。

Anthropocentrism shows its logos attribute by contrasting man with nature and endowing him with privileged status. Derrida deconstructs the binary opposition and logocentrism by eliminating the stability and absoluteness of symbolic meaning. The deconstruction of anthropocentrism shows that only the ecological holism based on the harmony and unity of human and ecosystem can maintain the common interests of human and nature.

With the deterioration of ecological environment, more and more people realize that the rapid development of human society has exceeded the endurance of nature, and human beings have walked to the edge of ecological crisis. If we do not restrain the excessive greed for nature and correct the ecological consequences, we will suffer ultimate disaster. Ecocriticism appears in this social context. It organically links literary research and environmental issues, and no longer regards human interests as the only legitimate interests, but extends its focus to the whole ecosystem. As an interdisciplinary and cross-cultural research, the orientation of ecological criticism is multifarious, such as eco - Marxism, eco - feminism, eco - socialism, the eco - aesthetics and so on. Although these ecological studies have different theoretical basis, they have a consensus that anthropocentrism is the ideological root of all ecological crises. Anthropocentrism regards human interests as the origin of value and the basis of moral evaluation, and holds that human beings are the only living beings with intrinsic value, so human interests are far more important than the environment and non-human plants and animals. This kind of cognition makes human beings put their own interests above nature. In order to pursue the maximum comfort of material life, they wantonly destroy nature and ecological environment, becoming the culprit of today's ecological crisis.

The origin of anthropocentrism is closely related to judeo-christianity and can be traced back to the bible. Genesis 1:26 god said, "let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." This dogma separates humanity from the nature on which it depends, establishing a hierarchy between man and nature, artificially creating what derrida calls a "hierarchy of violence." The human race becomes the sole and supreme ruler; Nature loses its position as the subject and becomes the silent "other". Lynne white, an American historian of science, declared that western Christianity was "the most anthropocentric religion in the world", and that in Christian theology "nature has no reason to exist except to serve mankind". The Renaissance and the enlightenment further consolidated the dominance of mankind while promoting social change. Renaissance humanists believed that human beings were independent, free and have unlimited development possibilities, occupying a central position in the universe, and the subject position of human speech was reaffirmed. Montaigne and petrarch, the father of the Renaissance, both believed that man was the center of the world and that nature was irrelevant. Shakespeare by the characters in the play to "man" a high praise, Hamlet said: "human is a remarkable masterpiece! What noble reason! What a great power! What a sight! What an elegant gesture! How like an angel in action! How like a god in wisdom! The essence of the universe! The chief of all things!" Miranda praised the beauty of the human world: "how beautiful human beings are! Strange world, with such splendid characters!" According to manes, an ecologist, since the Renaissance, "nature has changed from a spiritual being to a symbolic one, from a talking subject to a silent object, so that only human beings can enjoy the status of talking subject".

The enlightenment further emancipated people's minds, paving the way for the coming drastic social changes and the resulting rapid development of capitalism. The industrial revolution in the 19th century promoted the rapid development of science and technology and greatly improved people's living standards. Industrial and technological development reached unprecedented levels in the 20th century. While enjoying the convenience brought by modern science and technology, people are also intoxicated by the rapid development of science and technology, and blindly worship the power of science and technology, further alienating nature and rapidly marginalizing it in the social context.

In the binary opposition of human/nature generated by anthropocentrism, human is the center, the source of all values and the first item that takes precedence over nature. Nature is the secondary and subordinate item that serves for mankind. The presence of human beings and the absence of nature lead to the loss of the voice of the latter, and human beings become the origin and ultimate appeal of value. Nature is deprived of the possibility of being a subject and relegated to the subordination of human beings, whose existence significance is only to serve the interests of human beings. As a kind of human chauvinism, anthropocentrism endows human with unlimited right to dominate nature and establishes the privileged status of human cognitive subject and value subject. Nature is the object. Without the presence of human beings, nature becomes an empty value field, which negates the intrinsic nature of nature and cancels its heterogeneity. This "humanist construction" highlights the logos attribute of anthropocentrism and determines the necessity of its deconstruction.

Logos logos is derrida's summary of western philosophical culture and one of the important concepts of his deconstruction. Logos in Greek means "word", "speech", "reason" and so on. Derrida thought, from Plato to the western rationalist tradition of a fundamental error, or are looking for a can provide ultimate meaning referred to in the "transcendental", namely "logos", it can be "present" "nature" "truth", etc., as the center of the absolute references, independent of language games, is the source of all significance. Derrida pointed out that although saussure emphasizes the symbol, the difference of the relationship between sex and arbitrariness, only difference in the "language" is put forward, but he insisted on signifier and the signified are divided, believed that language is composed of symbols self sealing stability of autonomous system, ignored and external reference, the relationship between "suspension" words to study, the structure of the language becomes possible. Thus, language has a priority position over speech, becoming the dominant and central item in binary opposition.

Based on the French verb diffe rer, derrida generated the new noun diffe rance. In French, the verb 'diffe rer' means' differ 'and' defer '. Meaning from numerous options of the denotation of signifier, but because can't have what saussure hope since Ming of the absolute, meaning was as refers to the chain extension to disseminate around him, led to corroborate the infinite delay. The symbolic meaning generated by difference determines that it has no internality and directness. Each symbol includes traces of other symbols, which causes the endless delay on the signification chain and eliminates the stability and self-existence of the symbolic meaning. M.H. abrams, when discussing "difference", said: "this double meaning refers to the phenomenon that, on the one hand, a text provides a meaningful 'effect', which is the product of difference; But on the other hand, due to the sense can never be provided in a practical 'present', or an independent of language reality, derrida called transcendent, the determination of its significance in from one language to another interpretation of movement or be delayed in the 'game', as derrida says, it is a kind of endless return." Symbol is no longer a self-regulated language structure, a static existence with stable meaning, but an active dynamic generation in the middle, with no beginning and no end. Therefore, the transcendental signified and absolute reference which can provide the original meaning do not exist. They are not the center or starting point of the divergence of symbolic meaning. When derrida talks about "traces" in "multiple positions", he points out: "whether in the scope of oral speech or written speech, each element ACTS as a symbol without referring to another element which itself is not simply present. This symbolic chain results in each 'element' being built on the traces of the symbolic chain or other elements of the system. This chain of symbols, this is just the text that comes out of a change in another text. There is nothing purely present or absent within the element or system. There are only differences and traces everywhere." By eliminating the absolute stable meaning of symbols derrida deconstructs the transcendental pure origin and the existence foundation of logocentrism. Derrida also deconstructs the binary opposition in western philosophy. Western culture tends to use words with opposite meanings to express ideas, such as soul/body, male/female, language/writing, truth/falsehood, active, passive, present, absent and so on. This dichotomy of binary terms is not equal and juxtaposed without hierarchy. The first term becomes primary, central and original through the presupposition of ontological superiority. The second term is secondary, marginal, derivative. In the limited company, derrida writes, "from Plato to Rousseau, Descartes to husserl, all proceed in this manner, conceives of good before evil, of activity before negativity, of purity before imperfection, of simplicity before complexity, of essence before nature, of imitation before imitation, and so on." In the binary opposition of "presence/absence", "presence" is the positive active term, and "absence" is the negative pair of exclusion of "presence", but "presence" itself does not have any autonomous meaning, but relies on "absence" symbiotic. As its suppl e ment, the latter is not only its semantic addition, but also its semantic substitute, which is an indispensable part of its meaning. Derrida writes in on philology: "the absence of essence is precisely the peculiar nature of substitution: it could not have happened, and it did not happen: it could not have happened at any time. If it had appeared at any time, it would not have been what it is now, a substitute for something else to take their place. ... The substitute is neither present nor absent. The inherent lack of the first term determines the necessity of the second term as a supplement, which can also be converted into a substitute to obtain the position of the first term. However, this displacement is temporary and fluid, and will not solidify into a new binary opposition. Therefore, the two semantic terms of binary opposition are no longer distinct and distinct, but interdependent and equal. By deconstructing the stability and purity of symbolic meaning, derrida also deconstructs the absoluteness of binary opposition, eliminates the hierarchy between two opposite semantic terms, blurs the absolute difference between them, and cancels the privileged status of the first term.

According to derrida's theory, "human", "nature", "centrality" and so on are no longer language signs with stable meanings, but the products of infinite differentiation of signifiers, which are equal elements in the signifier chain, and the centrality of human beings disappears with the non-absolutism of "centrality". In the binary opposition of "man and nature", man is no longer the value fulcrum with privileged status, and nature, as a substitute, is a necessary part of mankind. Although anthropocentrism successfully cancels the presence of nature and guarantees the uniqueness and centrality of human beings, its absolute isolation from nature eliminates its indispensable substitute function, thus affecting the existence of human beings. Anthropocentrism does not allow the traces of nature to affect the presence of human beings, and fantasy can completely erase the traces of nature, making it a pure absence, but without the support of nature, human beings will also lose the basis of existence. As derrida points out, there is no essence or source of existence behind this presence, but rather a web of difference, an endless game of words.

Some critics have proposed "weak anthropocentrism" against anthropocentrism, or "strong anthropocentrism", which completely obliterates the intrinsic value of nature. Although this view recognizes the intrinsic value of nature, it still advocates the priority of human interests. For example, protecting the environment is mainly for the well-being of human beings, rather than for the consideration of maintaining the balance of ecosystem, which is still incidental and concomitant. Some researchers believe that humans, as the only animals in the world that can think rationally, can hardly transcend their own limitations to consider the needs of other species, and will unconsciously ignore the subjectivity of nature and other living creatures. Driven in this kind of thinking, although human to realize the seriousness of the ecological crisis, but in the consumerism and materialism is popular today, it is difficult to put forward the strategy of fundamentally improve the ecological environment, can only use technical means, make some passive change, such as promoting recycling of waste, not radically reduce waste production, the concept of the "shallow ecology". Shallow ecology is also a representation of anthropocentrism, which still pursues the binary opposition between human and nature, and only CARES about the condition of nature when it involves human's own interests. As opposed to a Norwegian philosopher arne he created a new theory of modern environmental ethics in the "deep ecology", it breaks through the limit of shallow ecology and think that the life of all species are equal, humans have the necessity of its existence, and desert forest also has its reason to exist, humans and other species is value and other parts, for the sake of the whole ecosystem health, human beings should make sacrifices when necessary. Deep ecology emphasizes the integrity of the ecosystem and cancelled the binary opposition of man and nature, the ecological system as composed of human, nature, animals, plants and so on in the community, but it also gave up the human subjectivity, and require the development of human to nature and other species to give up their rights, and even to sacrifice the interests of the whole system. This radical view of deep ecology has been called "eco-fascism" by some critics.

The theory of "ecological holism" improves the theory of deep ecology, and considers the ecological system from both human and nature in a more comprehensive and gentle way, so as to maintain the harmony of the whole ecological system. Ecological holism of the core idea is to put the interests of the whole ecosystem as the highest value, whether to promote and maintain ecosystem integrity, harmonious, stable, balanced and persistent as a fundamental measure of all things, as a critique of the human way of life, science and technology progress, the ultimate standard of economic growth and social development. Ecological holism is similar to the concept of "ecocentric", which is defined by the ecological thinker timothy o 'riordan as follows: "advocating the virtues of reverence, humility, responsibility and environmental protection for nature; It strongly requires the technology to minimize natural interference; It opposes all forms of artificial matter that seek only to be large and impersonal; It calls for a code of conduct based on the principles of ecological diversity and balance, which will contribute to the long-term sustainability and stability of the ecology. Although the word root centrism indicates that ecocentrism is also a logos centrism, where the natural center corresponds to the edge of human beings, the specific use of the word by ecologists indicates that they do not draw a strict distinction between the two concepts. Although ecocentalism is not rigorous in word formation, it conforms to the concept of ecological holism, insists on the harmonious coexistence of man and nature, corrects the "dualism" thought of anthropocentrism and shallow ecology that man and nature are opposite, and turns the antagonism ethics into the symbiosis ethics.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创paper代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的paper代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多paper代写范文 提供作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。