Nature as Symbol of God: A Cusanian Ecology

Environmental pragmatists are committed to analyzing questions of environmental policy. Bryan Norton's pragmatic critique of environmental decision-making shows how an implicit commitment to the fact/value distinction has hindered productive environmental action. Nonetheless, Norton, as well as the majority of environmental ethicists, have devoted more attention to theorizing value disagreements as a primary cause of controversy than to examining epistemic structures. A case study demonstrates why and how Norton's procedural account may be supplemented with sensitive attention to the construction of epistemic authority in environmental disputes. I recommend supporting the development of local knowledges and just distributions of epistemic authority.1. Pragmatism and Environmental Policy-MakingPragmatist environmental philosophers have made noteworthy contributions to persistent philosophical problems in environmental ethics, such as the source of value in nature, the nature of our moral obligations to the environment and to living creatures, and the objectivity of environmental value. But pragmatists have an additional interest beyond these ethical and ontological questions - they believe that philosophers can help make ideas clear in order to improve policy and action. To this end, pragmatists have contributed to debates in agricultural biotechnology (Thompson 2003), ecological restoration (Light 2000), water policy (Thompson 1996), and livestock production (McKenna 2004).In doing so, pragmatist environmental philosophers are following the lead of earlier pragmatists such as John Dewey who recognized that pragmatism can and ought to have real-life practical consequences and should not be limited to debates of a merely academic or scholastic nature. From this standpoint, contemporary pragmatists can contribute to the resolution of environmental problems by examining the process of inquiry and by evaluating procedures for political participation. Thus, pragmatists are well positioned to expand environmental philosophy beyond its current focus on ethics. A broader scope for environmental philosophy ought to include both an epistemological examination of what is known about natural environments and the application of social and political theory to evaluate and improve environmental decisionmaking. Such pragmatist contributions will:a. avoid, disintegrate, demystify, and disarm confusing metaphysical disputes,b. investigate how epistemic practices operate to resolve or, on the other hand, to amplify environmental problems,c. search for practical solutions to environmental controversies that are acceptable to all parties, andd. encourage participants in inquiry to be open to social learning and change.2. Bryan Norton's Pragmatic ProceduralismA good example of this is Bryan Norton wide-ranging account of public environmental decision-making in his recent book Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management (2005). Drawing on Deweyan pragmatism, he develops a procedural framework for reaching democratic resolutions to environmental problems. Norton believes that one of the largest obstacles to resolving environmental controversies and to implementing solutions to environmental problems is that people fail to communicate. The role of the philosopher here is twofold: first, to outline and justify general procedures for inquiry and action; and second, to help the parties to disputes make their goals clear as they work toward mutually acceptable (in the ideal case, win-win) solutions.Both of these philosophical goals have Deweyan roots - in other words, Norton has contextualized Deweyan inquiry for the environmental policy arena. To this end, Norton proposes that participants in environmental problem solving pick what he calls indicators. An indicator is a measurable quantity that is tied to an environmental goal. Importantly, Norton holds that the ideological basis for the goal is not directly relevant. …

Environmental Problem as a Philosophical Problem

The article is concerned with individual neologisms (occasionalisms, nonce words) in the poem «Aniara» by the Swedish writer H. Martinson. Two groups of nonce words can be distinguished in the poem: highly specialized terms (scientific and technical terminology) and Dorisburg`s «fantasy» slang. Both groups are functionally aimed at solving the main goal of the poem - to create artistic images that allow us to have a new look at the philosophical, ethical, social, environmental and other problems arisen in connection with the development of science and technology. Nonce words not only give new names to objects, actions and phenomena of reality, contribute to the poetic imagery in the poem, but also introduce additional meanings (and connections) to the text, break perception of the text and express the author`s outlook. The particularity of Martinson`s poem is that occasionalisms (technically verified language of the future and «marginal» language of the past) must be considered together, in the combination of their semantic meanings and connections, in order to understand Martinson`s views on the events of the 20th century.

Contemporary human ecology is understood as trans disciplirtary synthetic knowledge about man and his culture as a dynamic part of ecosystems. The main problems are following: philosophical problems of human environment, biological and social problems of man’s life environment, ecological problems of human biology, and problems of the cultural adaptatMnal behaviour of man and education for environment The main organizations (IOHE, SHE CISEII, CHE, IUAES) in the field of Human Ecology have been characterized. The CalnlabaSion at Human Ecology of the IUAES is a non governmental umbrella organization in the wait iddelilsieh have been organizing world academic conferences on human ecology since 1986.

The beginning of the XXI century is marked by a rethinking of many issues, one of which is the phenomenon of the earth. The latter was in the center of the discourse of socio-economic, socio-political, philosophical and environmental problems of our time. The history of mankind is the history of relations between the system «man – earth», characterized by ambivalence. Ukrainian philosophical paradigm has always gravitated to the space of human existence, actualizing the problem of human responsibility. However, it is the classics of Ukrainian literature that most acutely identified the problem of human relations with the earth.According to the analysis of scientific literature, the interaction of man and the earth is considered as a practical relationship, as a sacred relationship and as a condition for the formation of the worldview. These modes are considered in the plane of absolutization of the unit approach. The earth as a phenomenon is connected with the social and individual consciousness, but the earth is not considered as a socio-cultural phenomenon. This situation demonstrates the need for a polyparadigm methodology.More and more researchers note that the preservation of human existence can no longer be provided solely by increasing the material and technical base. It means that mankind should assimilate corresponding values of the attitude to the Earth. We are talking about overcoming the alienation of man from the earth as a consequence of the formation of technical civilization. One of the ways, according to the researchers, is the recognition of the sacred nature of the earth.The attitude of man to the earth as to his «body» is embodied in existentials: project, purpose, freedom, responsibility, hope, fear, etc. Architectonics of the earth is a symbol of the house where the person feels harmony with the world around. This approach overcomes the opposition of «man – earth/nature» and forms different models of human behavior. Man presents himself through the attitude to the earth: the processes of socialization, cultural identification, etc. It is the consideration of this principle that is an important methodological basis for the construction of a new system of interaction «man – earth». The destruction of this connection is felt by man at the level of existential experience. A striking example of the formation of a new paradigm of understanding the phenomenon of the Earth is the «Earth Charter». The earth appears as a multilevel phenomenon, where a person acts as a carrier of certain theoretical and practical ideas. At the same time, the earth is a space of human activity. The return to the categories of «beauty», «joy», «melancholy» indicates the beginning of the transformation of the paradigm of thinking. We witness the deviation from the idea of maximum benefit. These categories open new facets of earth existence and possibilities of their comprehension. Thus, turning to the metaphor «body» of the Earth outlines the possibility of creating an ontological image of the earth, and special attention is paid to the problem of actualization of those technologies corresponding to the essence of the earth.

The growing anxiety of humanity about its own fate is due to the global ecological crisis caused by information and technogenic activities. At the same time, the current ecological situation is a crisis; humanity seeks to get out of this crisis; this is problematic. There are both biological, geological and geographical, physical and mathematical aspects of describing the state and development of the natural environment, as well as philosophical, worldview, ethical and methodological problems of understanding this issue. The unification of all approaches is aimed at solving the main question: "How will modern humanity solve environmental problems?", because not only its future depends on it, but also the very possibility of the existence of Man. In scientific literature and in mass media there were two views on this issue. According to one of them, the nature of man is fully social. According to the other, it is not only social, but biologically determined as well. Hence, the argument suggests that the vital functions of humans are not solely determined by biological factors such as genetic makeup, metabolic intensity, and regulatory mechanisms. Rather, they are influenced by an endless array of other factors, not limited to these. The existence of these factors is recognized by everyone. Speech suggests that there are biologically programmed proto-social patterns of human behavior, yet not all of them are easily understood. Additionally, the mechanisms for determining and adjusting biosocial properties are not fully clarified in detail for all. To be a social creature, a man must be before living, that has the most difficult among living creatures biology. Presently, in the epoch of informatively technological revolution, biological bases of human creatures yield to the powerful deforming action. Neuropsychological stresses, environmental contaminants, and other factors alien to the history of the biosphere pose one of the global challenges in maintaining humans as a biological species. This compels us to reconsider the issue of the correlation between the biological and social aspects of humanity to a significant extent.

The article analyzes the works of well-known Turkish thinkers that touch upon the issues of philosophy of education, the ecology of culture, and theoretical and applied thoughts that are relevant in the context of global environmental problems. The use of interdisciplinary approaches by Turkish scientists in the study of these issues makes it possible to reveal philosophical problems from a variety of positions. Thus, we see modern philosophical discourses in the humanitarian studies of Turkish philosophers, reflecting the issues of ecological thinking, religious-political, ethical and legal aspects of human life and society, the creative potential of cultural and religious heritage.

Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. It is impossible to imagine solving modern environmental problems without studying the problems of environmental ethics and moral philosophy. Publications on environmental ethics and ethics of responsibility are available from H. Jonas, O. Leopold, and A. Schweitzer. They create an ontological ethics of values, where existence and preservation of existence occupy a central place. The concept of preservation of existence is supported by: A. Schopenhauer, A. Schweitzer, T. Mayer. Problems of the interaction of environmental ethics and science are put forward by O. Geffe, R. Holfeld, Y. Rau, I. Vogel and others. Ukrainian philosophers explore the principles of responsible politics, environmental ethics, philosophical problems of environmental education, philosophy of education: T. Hardashuk, O. Bazaluk, V. Baranivskyi, H. Berehova, V. Gur, A. Yermolenko, Z. Samchuk, M. Kiselyov, V. Krysachenko, K. Korsak, T. Chornoshtan and others. But regardless the significant contribution of philosophers, questions of environmental ethics, ethics for environmental education always need consideration. The research objective. Show the necessity of the concept of ecovitalism for environmental ethics and its methodological foundations. Consider the formation of environmental ethics on the basis of the absolute value of life, which has an impact on the formation of life-value orientations of modern people, the implementation of the main values of environmental ethics in practice. Realize that the future of humanity depends on whether it realizes the need for environmental ethics, environmental responsibility, ecologically appropriate behavior to preserve life on our planet. The statement of basic materials. The article examines the concept of ecovitalism, which is the basis of environmental ethics, primarily as an ecological support for life, focused not simply on the preservation of its natural foundations, but on the historically formed social attitude to nature as a value. At the same time, human activity, as a morally regulated life activity, is not based on purely natural determinations, but in a new quality of the natural-historical process, the basis of which is not nature itself, but the value of nature as a derivative of social progress. This gives grounds for asserting that the absolute value of life has becomes the main basis of modern environmental ethics. It is shown that environmental ethics is an important aspect in the formation of environmental education and creates new values for the preservation of human existence.

Human ecology is a synthetic transdisciplinary science concerned with human life and culture as a dynamic component of ecosystems. Human ecology (HE) synthesizes parts of the knowledge of several classical disciplines in a specific way. The essence of HE is the interaction between humans and the total environment. While the whole idea of HE is originated in anthropology, the first time the term .human ecology" was used in geography and next in sociology. Historically, in its monodisciplinary stage of development, the problems of several classical disciplines related to man and environment were called human ecology. The next stage was the multidisciplinary state, related to IBP (International Biological Programme), presenting a patchwork of information without syntheses. Contemporary HE offers more than a patchwork of knowledge and is based on system theory. In human ecology, human evolution and ontogeny are understood as processes of adaptation and adjustment to the environment. HE may be considered to have two parallel foci: an academic HE as a scientific discipline, and an action-oriented HE (environmental engineering, preservation, education, and health protection against environmental deterioration). In HE several divisions and research perspectives may be defined: 1. Philosophical problems of HE; 2. Social and biological problems of human-environment; 3. Environmental problems of human biology and 4. Cultural adaptive behavior.