User:Esay02/Anthropocentrism

Anthropocentrism (/ˌænθroʊpoʊˈsɛntrɪzəm/; from Ancient Greek ἄνθρωπος (ánthrōpos) 'human being', and κέντρον (kéntron) 'center') is the belief that human beings are the central or most important entity in the universe. The term can be used interchangeably with humanocentrism, and some refer to the concept as human supremacy or human exceptionalism. From an anthropocentric perspective, humankind is seen as separate from nature and superior to it, and other entities (animals, plants, minerals, etc.) are viewed as resources for humans to use. Eating Animals, a novel written by Jonathan Foer, describes anthropocentrism as "The conviction that humans are the pinnacle of evolution, the appropriate yardstick by which to measure the lives of other animals, and the rightful owners of everything that lives." This quote exemplifies the deeper meaning behind his novel: how human beings are overtaking the animal industry, which is being overshadowed by financial and personal gain.[improper synthesis?] Human instincts, such as anthropocentrism, have refined the meat industry to many inhumane and unethical practices. Human projection onto animals tend to be unethical.[neutrality is disputed] This is because humans see themselves as superior over animals, which can be used as an example of anthropocentrism.

Anthropocentrism interprets or regards the world in terms of human values and experiences. It is considered to be profoundly embedded in many modern human cultures and conscious acts. It is a major concept in the field of environmental ethics and environmental philosophy, where it is often considered to be the root cause of problems created by human action within the ecosphere. However, many proponents of anthropocentrism state that this is not necessarily the case: they argue that a sound long-term view acknowledges that the global environment must be made continually suitable for humans and that the real issue is shallow anthropocentrism.

Environmental philosophy
Anthropocentrism, also known as homocentricism or human supremacism, has been posited by some environmentalists, in such books as Confessions of an Eco-Warrior by Dave Foreman and Green Rage by Christopher Manes, as the underlying (if unstated) reason why humanity dominates and sees the need to "develop" most of the Earth. Anthropocentrism is believed by some to be the central problematic concept in environmental philosophy, where it is used to draw attention to claims of a systematic bias in traditional Western attitudes to the non-human world that shapes humans' sense of self and identities. Val Plumwood argued that anthropocentrism plays an analogous role in green theory to androcentrism in feminist theory and ethnocentrism in anti-racist theory. Plumwood called human-centredness "anthrocentrism" to emphasise this parallel.

One of the first extended philosophical essays addressing environmental ethics, John Passmore's Man's Responsibility for Nature has been criticised by defenders of deep ecology because of its anthropocentrism, often claimed to be constitutive of traditional Western moral thought. Indeed, defenders of anthropocentrism concerned with the ecological crisis contend that the maintenance of a healthy, sustainable environment is necessary for human well-being as opposed to for its own sake. According to William Grey, the problem with a "shallow" viewpoint is not that it is human-centred: "What's wrong with shallow views is not their concern about the well-being of humans, but that they do not really consider enough in what that well-being consists. According to this view, we need to develop an enriched, fortified anthropocentric notion of human interest to replace the dominant short-term, sectional and self-regarding conception." In turn, Plumwood in Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason argued that Grey's anthropocentrism is inadequate.

Many devoted environmentalists encompass a somewhat anthropocentric-based philosophical view supporting the fact that they will argue in favor of saving the environment for the sake of human populations. Grey writes: "We should be concerned to promote a rich, diverse, and vibrant biosphere. Human flourishing may certainly be included as a legitimate part of such a flourishing." Such a concern for human flourishing amidst the flourishing of life as a whole, however, is said to be indistinguishable from that of deep ecology and biocentrism, which has been proposed as both an antithesis of anthropocentrism and as a generalised form of anthropocentrism.

Feminism
'''(EDIT START) The relationship between anthropocentrism and feminism is complex and multifaceted, touching upon intersections between environmental ethics, gender studies, and social justice. While the primary focus of feminism is on the advocacy of women's rights and equality, there is a growing recognition of the interconnectedness between ecological issues and feminist concerns. Feminist scholars and activists argue that anthropocentrism contributes to environmental degradation, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, which often include women . Issues such as pollution, resource extraction, and climate change can have differential impacts on women, particularly those in economically disadvantaged regions. Ecofeminism is a branch of feminism that explores the connections between the oppression of women and the exploitation of the environment. Critics of anthropocentrism within ecofeminism argue that the devaluation of the natural world is linked to the devaluation of women, both stemming from hierarchical and exploitative power structures. Anthropocentrism is reflected in language and cultural narratives that often reinforce gendered stereotypes and reinforce traditional power dynamics. Feminist scholars argue for the reevaluation of language and representation to challenge anthropocentric norms and promote a more equitable and inclusive worldview. Feminist perspectives on anthropocentrism vary globally, acknowledging that the impact of environmental issues on women can differ across cultural, economic, and geographical contexts. Addressing anthropocentrism requires an inclusive feminist approach that considers diverse experiences and challenges.'''

(EDIT END)

Christian Tradition
In the 1985 CBC series "A Planet For the Taking", Dr. David Suzuki explored the Old Testament roots of anthropocentrism and how it shaped human views of non-human animals. Some Christian proponents of anthropocentrism base their belief on the Bible, such as the verse 1:26 in the Book of Genesis:"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after 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 all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."The use of the word "dominion" in the Genesis has been used to justify an anthropocentric worldview, but recently some have found it controversial, viewing it as possibly a mistranslation from the Hebrew. However an argument can be made that the Bible actually places all the importance on God as creator, and humans as merely another part of creation.

Moses Maimonides, a Torah scholar who lived in the twelfth century AD, was renowned for his staunch opposition to anthropocentrism. He referred to humans as "just a drop in the bucket" and asserted that "humans are not the axis of the world." He also claimed that anthropocentric thinking is what leads humans to believe in the existence of evil things in nature. According to Rabbi Norman Lamm, Moses Maimonides "refuted the exaggerated ideas about the importance of man and urged us to abandon these fantasies.

Lead
- This article is well-articulated and thoroughly explains how anthropocentrism can be present in many facets of the world. There is a focus on history and the background of anthropocentrism but also an emphasis on its role in present day ecological policy and feminism.