首页> 外文期刊>Ethics, policy and environment >Anthropocentric Indirect Arguments: Return of the Plastic-tree Zombies
【24h】

Anthropocentric Indirect Arguments: Return of the Plastic-tree Zombies

机译:以人类为中心的间接论点:塑树僵尸的回归

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Forget Aldo Leopold. Or Holmes Rolston, Ⅲ, or Baird Callicott. Forget Arne Naess. I vote for Martin H. Krieger as the most influential environmental philosopher of all time. It has been over 40 years since he published 'What's wrong with plastic trees?' and it has been over 30 years since we killed and buried that argument-or so I thought. (I can still hear the sound of the clods of dirt, thrown by Mark Sagoff and me, on the coffin.) Yet I guess the appeal to human interest arguments is like a zombie that never really dies, always returning to wreak havoc on the civilized world.
机译:忘了奥尔多·利奥波德(Aldo Leopold)。或Holmes Rolston,Ⅲ或Baird Callicott。忘记Arne Naess。我将马丁·克里格(Martin H.Krieger)选为有史以来最有影响力的环境哲学家。自他发表“塑料树怎么了?”至今已有40多年了。自从我们杀死并掩盖了这一论据以来已有30多年了-我想。 (我仍然可以听见马克·萨格夫和我在棺材上扔出的土块的声音。)但是,我猜想对人类利益论点的吸引力就像是一个永不消亡的僵尸,总是重蹈覆辙。文明的世界。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Ethics, policy and environment》 |2014年第3期|264-266|共3页
  • 作者

    ERIC KATZ;

  • 作者单位

    Department of Humanities, New Jersey Institute of Technology, University Heights, Newark, NJ 07102, USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号