What are the flaws of anthropocentrism

Anthropocentrism, as a value, is both an instinctive choice and the right choice for human beings. Under the guidance of such values, modern anthropocentrism has indelible legitimacy in both theory and practice, but of course there are some shortcomings. At present, ecoethicists often refute the shortcomings of modern anthropocentrism from the perspective of non-anthropocentrism, and presuppose that non-anthropocentrism is correct, which makes it difficult to obtain fair and objective evaluation results.

Only by finding a fair and objective criterion can modern anthropocentrism be accurately judged. Because of the important position and objectivity of the humanistic spirit in ecological ethics, it can become one of the judging criteria. Under the judgment of the humanistic spirit, it can be found that modern anthropocentrism is influenced by some negative aspects of Western philosophy and scientific rationality, and some of its philosophical foundations and specific views hinder the harmonious coexistence of man and nature, which is not conducive to the cultivation of the humanistic spirit, and needs to be improved by drawing on some ideological and cultural resources.

Although Confucian ecological ethics is not an ecological ethics theory in the modern sense, its humanistic characteristics of emphasizing emotion, personnel and moral cultivation can completely give some humanistic enlightenment to modern anthropocentrism on the philosophical basis and specific viewpoints, and promote the further improvement of modern anthropocentrism.

First of all, modern anthropocentrism takes the interests of human beings as the fundamental yardstick for dealing with the relationship between man and nature, which is still an anthropocentric view. Second, modern anthropocentrism treats nature from the perspective of human interests and values, and does not treat man and nature as equals, and this unequal relationship between man and nature will inevitably strengthen the unequal relationship between human beings. Thirdly, at the practical level, modern anthropocentrism proceeds from the interests and values of human beings to protect the natural environment.

Narrowing the extension of the natural environment and limiting the natural environment to the human environment. Humans only focus on protecting the natural environment related to humans, not protecting the ecological environment of all species.

Summary. Human beings consider themselves to be the most important beings in the universe, and other living beings and the resources of nature can be used or disposed of. Humans believe that they have special intelligence and abilities to control and transform the natural world.

Human beings separate themselves from other living beings and the natural world, believing that human beings are unique and have values and rights that are different from other living beings.

Human beings consider themselves to be the most important beings in the universe, and the resources of other living beings and nature can be used or controlled. Human beings believe that they have special wisdom and ability to control and transform the natural world. Humans separate themselves from other living beings and the natural world, believing that they are unique and have values and rights that distinguish them from other living beings.

Human beings prioritize their own needs and desires, exploiting and exploiting other living and natural resources. Human beings regard their own culture, values and social organization as universal and reasonable standards, ignoring the existence of their own cultures and values. Humanity's achievements in science and technology are seen as priority factors, ignoring impacts on the natural world and biodiversity.

Human beings put their own needs and well-being ahead of the interests of other living beings and the natural world, ignoring the importance of environmental protection and sustainable development. The anthropocentric view has been questioned and criticized because it often leads to damage to the environment and other living beings, and ignores the interconnectedness and interconnectedness of humans with other living beings and the natural world.

The so-called anthropocentrism is people-oriented, advocating that the interests of human beings should be put in the first place in the interaction between man and nature, and emphasizing that the interests of human beings should become the fundamental value yardstick for human beings to deal with the relationship between themselves and the external ecological environment. The theory holds that there are real obligations between people, and that nature only plays the role of a tool for such obligations. However, non-anthropocentrism, that is, ecocentrism, is sharply critical of anthropocentrism, regards anthropocentrism as the lowest state of environmental protection, and believes that human beings should comprehensively transcend anthropocentrism and establish an ethical value system and a corresponding development concept with natural ecology as the scale.

Non-anthropocentrism argues that anthropocentrism is the source of the evil of ecological destruction and environmental pollution. And this non-anthropocentrism is said to include a variety of schools, such as animal rights theory, earth ethics, deep ecology, bioregionalism, ecofeminism, etc., in the final analysis, it is a kind of biocentrism and ecocentrism. The international political background of this protracted controversy is the dispute between the two camps of the "red green party" and the "green green party" in the green movement.

The "Red and Green Party", which advocates anthropocentrism, also known as green socialism, combines socialist theory with the ecological movement, and is an important political force in the contemporary socialist movement, and its main members are Marxists and social democrats.

Anthropocentrism, also known as "anthropocentrism", is the doctrine that human beings are the center of things. Like other cultural concepts, the concept of anthropocentrism also has the continuity and discontinuity of historical development, and this concept has been used in three senses: anthropocentrism has always been adopted as a value and value scale, it is to take the interests of human beings as the origin of values and the basis of moral evaluation, and there are and only human beings are the subject of value judgments. Protagoras's "man is the measure of all things" in ancient Greece expresses the earliest anthropocentric thought, which believes that individual people or human beings are the measure of all things, that is, human beings are the center of observation.

The doctrine of the big universe and the small universe put forward by philosophers after the Renaissance regarded man as a small universe and believed that man reflected the whole universe, which was also a manifestation of anthropocentrism. Various subjective idealisms that believe that man creates the real world, and that the human spirit or human will creates the whole world, also reflects this idea that man is the center of the universe. Postmodernism argues that anthropocentrism exaggerates man's ability to transform the world, inverts the relationship between man and the natural world, and must oppose its subjectivity and the idea that the subject and the object, i.e., man and nature, must be opposed.

The extremes of anthropocentrism have gradually led it to the opposite of nature, leading to nature's revenge on humans. The way to eliminate this kind of retaliation is to arouse people's "moral conscience" and "ecological conscience" of nature through the moral education of ecological civilization, so that people can realize that the relationship between man and nature is closely interconnected, interacting, mutually beneficial and symbiotic, and harmoniously coexisting.

Human beings have the responsibility and obligation to respect the right of other species in nature to exist. The enjoyment of nature is not a human prerogative, but a right shared by all species. On the basis of maintaining ecological balance, man should rationally develop nature, standardize human behavior towards nature, limit man's mode of production and consumption to the scope that the ecosystem can bear, and advocate loving nature, respecting nature, and protecting it.

Although the theoretical foothold and destination of weak anthropocentrism are the same as strong anthropocentrism, which is also the need for human survival and development, weak anthropocentrism advocates rational grasp and weighing of human interests and needs, and opposes the absolutization of human interests and needs. The value of natural objects is not only that they can satisfy people's interests, but also that they can enrich people's spiritual world, and natural things also have intrinsic value.

Weak anthropocentrism, while acknowledging the superiority of man, also recognizes the value of other organisms conscious of the life complex, and that man has an obligation to care for them morally.

1. In the value relationship between man and nature, only human beings with consciousness are the subject, and nature is the object. The scale of value evaluation must be grasped and always in the hands of human beings, and whenever we talk about "value", we mean "meaning to people".

2. In the ethical relationship between man and nature, the idea that man is the goal should be implemented, and the first to put forward the proposition of "man is the goal" was Kant, which is considered to be a sign of the theoretical completion of anthropocentrism.

3. All human activities are to meet the needs of their own survival and development, and if they cannot achieve this goal, the activities are meaningless, so everything should be based on the interests of human beings.