doc Û Living Through the End of Nature 252 pages Ó naturaltreatment

mobi Living Through the End of Nature

doc Û Living Through the End of Nature 252 pages Ó naturaltreatment ß How environmentalism can reinvent itself in a postnature age a proposal for navigating between naive naturalism and technological arroganceEnvironmentalists have always worked to protect the wildness of nature but now must find a newTechnological utopia He proposes a third way that takes seriously the breached boundary between humans and nature and charts a co evolutionary path in which environmentalists exploit the tension between naturalism and mastery to build a sustainable ecologically vibrant and socially just worldBeautifully written and thoughtfully argued Living Through the End of Nature provides a powerful vision for environmentalism's futur The environmental thought is haunted by the 'end of nature' or rather 'ends of nature' as Wapner properly names it for some time now and it seems that few have tried to sketch the possible way forth and fewer yet if any succeeded in finding a strong ground a new paradigm for environmentalism Paul Wapner in this uite nicely written and easily readable book tried to do this Did he succeed I'm not very convincedIn the first half of the book Wapner skillfully but with not enough philosophical precision in my opinion analyses the presumptions or paradigms underlying the environmental debate for decades His distinction between 'dream of naturalism' and 'dream of mastery' is a good analytical conceptualization and enables him to pinpoint some of the important beliefs and reveal metaphysical bases of both environmentalists and eco skeptics Though this dichotomy is not entirely novel basically it's very akin to the distinction between ecobiocentric approach on one hand and anthropocentric on the other the analysis is fairly thorough and allows the reader to fully realize the hiatus between the two worldviews and understand that there cannot possibly be any meaningful debate between themAs Wapner shows both these dreams build upon fundamental even metaphysical distinction between nature and humans The 'dream of naturalism' takes nature as the standard against which the true good right and beautiful is measured On the other hand the 'dream of mastery' does the opposite proclaiming humanity as the measure of truth goodness rightness and beauty In both cases he nicely shows how the opposite groups environmentalists and eco skeptics employ these beliefs and assumptions in their agenda and argumentation He then argues that neither of them is philosophically nor practically tenable in a post nature age The second half is dedicated to charting a possible way forward I agree with the author that maintaining the aforementioned dichotomy and even holding to the notion of nature as something fundamentally other than human and with no human intervention is a no go or at least a dead end However his proposition about choosing a middle path in form of realizing that we cannot leave nature alone and thus it's upon us to decide what ie how much destroyed world we want to live in appears to me as a road to relativistic hellThere are two things I see as the most problematic1 It's nice and probably also good to get rid of the 'dream of naturalism' and some untenable metaphysical assumptions that go with it But if the skeptics do not abandon the 'dream of mastery' as well won't the environmentalism just loose its ground and accepting some parts of the 'mastery' discourse as Wapner advises give the skeptics a warm feeling that they have been right all along And it's very likely that they won't abandon it Why should they The dream is here at least 300 years when Francis Bacon called to scholars for nature to be bound into service hounded in her wanderings and put on the rack and tortured for her secrets and since then it brought us here in the North prosperity and well being never seen before Does Wapner think that by doing this environmentalism can attract people from the other side To me it seems like telling them OK go on with what you're doing just try to do a little less of it From the economic perspective it apppears as a sort of chimera similar to environmental economy compared to ecological or green economy In some parts Wapner even openly admits his sympathy for further development just replacing fossil fuels with renewables and the like This to me is of a death trap than way forward not only for environmentalism but for the humanity as a whole Wapner sees this danger pp 211 212 and claims that For without the 'god' of humanity behind the dream of mastery environmentalists can gesture toward such a dream without worrying about abandoning established and cherished principles And that's precisely where he is plainly wrong did the skeptics revoke the god of humanity or are they about to do so I'm not saying that we should also hold to the 'dream of naturalism' and its untenable principles and assumptions uite the contrary as I said before Holding to them can be and often already is also very undermining for the environmental movement I just don't see Wapner's way as the right way forward That is related to the second problematic point of his work as I see it2 Reading the book published in 2010 I had a strong feeling that environmentalism is somehow missing the train The critiue that leads Wapner and others eg Steven Vogel whose new book Thinking Like a Mall Environmental Philosophy After the End of Nature I'm about to read next to trying to find new ways for environmental discourse and movement is than 20 years old Bill McKibben published The End of Nature at the end of 80's and the eco criticism that deconstructed the idea of nature flourished mainly in the 90's A than a decade later the only answer Wapner can offer is what a surprise embracing the ambiguity of the current postmodern situation and learn to live with paradoxes Where is the invention here It just reveals that the environmentalism may still be confined in its own bubble One can rather read a plethora of postmodern philosophers sociologists political theorists and others that reflected this general situation years ago and proposed similar way of dealing with it but with philosophical precision and probably even with invention Unfortunately I didn't read them yet so I'm unable to compare it betterI'm probably doing environmentalism an injustice generalizing from Wapner's book There are surely many environmental theorists that deal with the situation in better and inventive ways My reaction is probably exaggerated a bit and that is mainly because the book tries to sell the ideas as the only viable way for the movement or at least the most viable and because the book actually hit the nail on the head in revealing what I take to be the biggest problem and challenge of environmentalism today that it is unable to deal with the postmodern situation and all the critiue it brought whether stemming from the biophysical situation of the world concepts' deconstruction or some strains of the evolution biology and come up with a strong and fruitful philosophical and practical stance that would offer a genuine way forward and a real alternative to the mainstream thought economics and politics Wapner's book highlighted this and not by criticizing the dream of naturalism but by the chimeric alternative it offersThere is however one aspect of the alternative the author proposes that is definitely worth consideration and that is the shift in the meaning of wilderness or rather wildness pp 162 163 from the notion of nature untamed by humans which is as many authors rightly show a very ethnocentric or even racist concept based on colonialist view of the Americas in 15th century to a notion of otherness that can be found both outside and inside us here to my great pleasure Wapner cites David Abram This kind of wildness is for me precisely what we should try to protect and maybe even cultivate as George Monbiot elouently describes in his recent book Feral

Paul Wapner Ð Living Through the End of Nature pdf

E nature reuire extensive human intervention At the same time we are repeatedly told that there is no such thing as nature itself only our own conceptions of it One person's endangered species is another's dinner or source of income In Living Through the End of Nature Paul Wapner probes the meaning of environmentalism in a postnature ageWapner argues that we can neither go back to a preindustrial Elysium nor forward to a Well thought out and thoroughly explainedThis is a great volume for those who are looking for a way to see passed the political binary that is environmental politics today It is honest well reasoned and hopeful A nice change from the absolute doom and gloom of environmental literature

text ✓ Living Through the End of Nature Ð Paul Wapner

Living Through the End of NatureHow environmentalism can reinvent itself in a postnature age a proposal for navigating between naive naturalism and technological arroganceEnvironmentalists have always worked to protect the wildness of nature but now must find a new direction We have so tamed colonized and contaminated the natural world that safeguarding it from humans is no longer an option Humanity's imprint is now everywhere and all efforts to preserv In Living Through the End of Nature Paul Wapner informs us of the progression of American environmentalism The novel takes the reader through the history of interaction between man and nature and addresses his theory of a post nature age Wapner points out what modern environmentalists have to do in order to live in peace with nature without completely stopping human technological advances Within the novel Wapner makes sure to structure the book to emphasize the most important points with future environmentalism He makes sure to include different opinions about the subject from many naturalists with varying views Although I found the structure and writing of the book intriguing as I continued reading the sections seemed to drag on with the same repeated topics The initial debate on whether humans and nature could coexist in harmony was fascinating but the tangled concepts about the one subject made the book difficult to understand at times Overall I give this book a 45 on GoodReads I loved reading a book where the author explains both sides of the spectrum when discussing modern environmentalism and still had the courage to address the intimidating future I would recommend this to book to an older audience because of the complexity of the writing but if you truly enjoy debates on this topic like myself this would be the perfect book