Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Open Access Dissertations and Theses Community
  3. Open Access Dissertations and Theses
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/13441
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorAllen, Barryen_US
dc.contributor.authorSkakoon, Elizabeth M.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-18T17:03:57Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-18T17:03:57Z-
dc.date.created2013-09-26en_US
dc.date.issued2005-09en_US
dc.identifier.otheropendissertations/8261en_US
dc.identifier.other9463en_US
dc.identifier.other4634486en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/13441-
dc.description.abstract<p>This thesis identifies a major paradigm in environmental philosophy. According to many environmental philosophers, the root of our ecological problems is our Modernist world view. Modernity has created a dangerous dualism between humanity and nature. This dualism both encourages a destructive, anthropocentric attitude, and portrays nature as passive, mechanistic, and suitable for domination. Many of these philosophers, most notably deep ecologists, think that the solution to our ecological problems lies in recovering the wild, true aspect of nature and replacing the Modernist world view with an ecological world view. I call this paradigm ''the Recovery Project."</p> <p>I reject this paradigm on the basis that it contains too many problematic premises, notably the idea that nature is ontologically independent. I use contemporary theories in philosophical anthropology to criticize the Recovery Project's realist thesis and their argument that Modernity is responsible for our ecological crisis. This criticism reveals the essential relationship between humanity and artifacts. Although I formulate a constructivist position, it is not the social constructivist thesis critiqued by many environmental philosophers.</p> <p>I propose a new starting point for environmental philosophy-an idea I call "artifactual anthropocentrism." This version of anthropocentrism accounts for the phenomenon of unintended consequences, which is neglected by standard versions of anthropocentrism and the Recovery Project. I then examine the ecological problems associated with our urban environment. Through a discussion of urbanization and traditional agricultural methods, I explain the difference between domesticating and socializing natural entities and the problems associated with these processes. Continuing the focus on the relationship between humans and artifacts, I conclude that environmental philosophy may be able to address these problems by reorienting itself as a philosophy of technique.</p>en_US
dc.subjectPhilosophyen_US
dc.subjectPhilosophyen_US
dc.titleThe Recovery Project and Artifactual Ecology: A New Direction for Environmental Thoughten_US
dc.typethesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentPhilosophyen_US
dc.description.degreeDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)en_US
Appears in Collections:Open Access Dissertations and Theses

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
fulltext.pdf
Open Access
11.49 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue