Scheda libro

Rivista di Estetica

36,00 €

aggiungi al carrello (cod: 9788878859210)

cartaceo, ISBN 9788878859210

20,00 €

aggiungi al carrello (cod: 9788878859227)

PDF 0 B, ISBN 9788878859227

Rivista di Estetica 75 Ethics of the Environmental Crisis
anno LX, n. 75/2020

a cura di Carlo Burelli, Davide Pala

anno di pubblicazione 2020
pp. 200
ISBN cartaceo 9788878859210
ISBN pdf 9788878859227
DOI 10.4000/estetica.7185

Few would deny that we are currently experiencing an environmental crisis of unprecedented magnitude and severity. Yet, much less clear is what phenomena the environmental crisis refers to and why they are particularly unjust. For instance, one might wonder whether the environmental crisis is unjust because it impinges on the intrinsic value of the environment, or because it severely affects humans and their human rights in particular. Equally, it is far from clear who should bear the responsibility to remedy the environmental crisis and to what extent.
This issue of Rivista di Estetica addressees these questions with the aim of clarifying what the environmental crisis is and involves, as well as how we should frame it from a justice-based perspective. It accomplishes this in four sections. The first section investigates what the environment is. The second section addresses the environmental crisis through the normative lenses of the concept of responsibility. The third section analyses the environmental crisis through a human-rights perspective. Finally, the fourth section introduces some new paths that the literature may and perhaps should take. This issue will appeal to anyone interested in the environment and its crisis.

indice articoli

Carlo Burelli, Davide Pala, The environmental crisis and its injustice: An (inevitably short) introduction

ontological reflections on the environment

Tiziana Andina, Climate issue: The principle of transgenerational responsibility
Francesca De Vecchi, Common-surrounding world and qualitative social ontology – phenomenological insights for the environment and its crisis

responsibility for the environment

Davide Vecchi, Organismality grounds species collective responsibility
Silvia Bacchetta, Reasons for agreeing, reasons for complying: The Paris Agreement and the compliance issue

the environment and human rights

Sebastian Muders, Human dignity: Final, inherent, absolute?
Markku Oksanen, On tackling environmental crisis through human rights

new problems and perspectives

Andrea Borghini, Nicola Piras, Beatrice Serini, Ontological frameworks for food utopias
Sue Spaid, Tying climate justice to hydrological justice

varia

Adam Andrzejewski, Mateusz Salwa, The ontology of landscape

Ernesto C. Sferrazza Papa, Filosofia e Border Studies. Dal confine come “oggetto” al confine come “dispositivo”

ESTRATTI
Burelli - Pala, The environmental crisis and its injustice: An (inevitably short) introduction
	pdf 312.9 KB	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7190	RdE75_01-Burelli-Pala	7,00 €	RdE75_01-Burelli-Pala"
Andina, Climate issue: The principle of transgenerational responsibility
	pdf 342.3 KB ABSTRACT ↗ The multidimensional nature of climate change makes it a complex matter, on both the theoretical and practical planes. The urgency and centrality of the issues and problems it poses are of key importance for our species and its survival. In this paper, we propose pairing the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities – the cornerstone of climate talks over the last thirty years – with the criterion of transgenerational responsibility. Such a criterion seeks to focus particular attention on the issues of diachronic justice and, in particular, intergenerational justice.	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7201	RdE75_02-Andina	7,00 €	RdE75_02-Andina"
Vecchi, Organismality grounds species collective responsibility
	pdf 365.9 KB ABSTRACT ↗ It is frequently claimed that our species is responsible for climate change, for a new impending mass extinction, for destabilising ecosystems dynamics etc. These claims might be interpreted literally as meaning that it is our species, not merely its constituent organisms, that is causing climate change, biodiversity loss and ecosystem upheaval. Such literal interpretation depends on what kind of answer is given to the general theoretical question concerning whether supra-organismal biological entities such as groups, populations and species can be morally responsible for anything as collectives. I shall argue that organismality is the biological property grounding species collective moral responsibility. The question is thus whether our species is organismal enough to make it a morally responsible causal agent.	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7259	Rde75_04-Vecchi	7,00 €	Rde75_04-Vecchi"
Bacchetta, Reasons for agreeing, reasons for complying: The Paris Agreement and the compliance issue
	pdf 299 KB ABSTRACT ↗ How should we deal with noncompliance in the context of the Paris Agreement? After having delimited the scope of noncompliance as a motivational issue, I will argue that two kinds of reasons can motivate agents to comply, moral and prudential reasons. Then, I will show that moral and prudential reasons can motivate compliance, although in different ways, as moral reasons require the institutions, whereas prudential reasons are thought to be self-sufficing. Prudential reasons come with the assumption that they have ample motivational force to elicit compliance. I will contend that, for what concerns climate treaties, this assumption does not hold. To do so, I will argue that, from an interest-based perspective, reasons for agreeing on a treaty rarely conflate with the reasons that motivate agents to complying with it, so, if we want to ensure compliance, the international climate regime should establish institutions to oversee compliance when prudential reasons fails to motivate.	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7285	Rde75_05-Bacchetta	7,00 €	Rde75_05-Bacchetta"
Muders, Human dignity: Final, inherent, absolute?
	pdf 371.4 KB ABSTRACT ↗ In the traditional understanding, human dignity is often portrayed as a «final», «inherent», and «absolute» value. If human dignity as the core of the status of a human being did indeed have thos characteristics, this would yield a severe limitation for obligations that stem from the moral status of non-human animals, plants, eco systems and other entities discussed in environmental ethics; for obligations that arise from human dignity standardly take priority over the duties toward entities with non-human moral status. Yet, many theorists of human dignity nowadays have given up the traditional picture in favour of a more «contingent» understanding of human dignity that abandons one or more of its traditional characteristics. In this paper, I argue that to the contrary, we have good reasons to think that the three characteristics of human dignity just mentioned can indeed be attributed to a value that deserves the name «human dignity». In a first part, I argue for a specific understanding of the three value characteristics under consideration. After these preliminaries, I show in a second part that given such an understanding, we have ample evidence that we can indeed say that human dignity is an inherent, absolute and final value; and also that these three characteristics are properties of a single value.	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7319	Rde75_06-Muders	7,00 €	Rde75_06-Muders"
Oksanen, On tackling environmental crisis through human rights
	pdf 350.8 KB ABSTRACT ↗ There is broad scientific consensus on the anthropogenic roots of the environmental crisis, whether we think about biodiversity decline, climate change, pollution or, in general, about the increasing scarcity of ecological space for living entities. Unlike humans, other living beings have no notion of crisis and are probably not bothered by such highly abstract concerns. When a crisis occurs, non-humans either adapt or vanish, whereas humans may see it lurking ahead and become anxious. This human urge to reflect on the state of nature and the role of humanity is manifest in the new concept of the Anthropocene. Originally, human rights and environmental crisis entered the public sphere as separate themes but from the 1970s, they began to appear together on a regular basis in legal and political documents and in research literature. Philosophically, the ultimate question is whether we humans are to blame ourselves for the environmental crisis because of the rights that we grant to ourselves. In other words, are human rights, above all, a source of the environmental crisis or an essential element in the search for solutions? In this article, this quandary is approached philosophically from the belief that the framework of human rights might help us envisage a civilised way out of the crisis.	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7354	Rde75_07-Oksanen	7,00 €	Rde75_07-Oksanen"
Borghini - Piras - Serini, Ontological frameworks for food utopias
	pdf 420.8 KB ABSTRACT ↗ World food production is facing exorbitant challenges like climate change, use of resources, population growth, and dietary changes. These, in turn, raise major ethical and political questions, such as how to uphold the right to adequate nutrition, or the right to enact a gastronomic culture and to preserve the conditions to do so. Proposals for utopic solutions vary from vertical farming and lab meat to diets filled with the most fanciful insects and seaweeds. Common to all proposals is a polarized understanding of food and diets, famously captured by Warren Belasco in the contraposition between technological fixes and anthropological fixes. According to the first, technology will deliver clean, just, pleasurable, affordable food; future generations will not need to adjust much of their dietary cultures. According to the second, future generations should dramatically change their dietary habits (what they eat and how they eat it) to achieve a sustainable diet. The two fixes found remarkably distinct perspectives over dietary politics and the ethics of food production and consumption. In this paper we argue that such polarized thinking rests on a misrepresentation of the ontological status of food, which in turn affects the underlying ethical and political issues. Food is a socially constructed object that draws in specific ways on habits, norms, traditions, geographical, and climatic conditions. Although this thesis seems somewhat obvious, its consequences on the ethical and political perspectives on the future of food have not been derived properly. After introducing the issue at stake (§ 1), we point out the polarities that characterize food utopias (§ 2) and their ontological faults (§ 3). We hence suggest that a socio-ontological analysis of food can better deliver the principles for a foundation of food utopias (§ 4)	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7375	Rde75_08-BorghiniPirasSerini	7,00 €	Rde75_08-BorghiniPirasSerini"
Andrzejewski - Salwa, The ontology of landscape
	pdf 413.8 KB ABSTRACT ↗ The paper aims at an analysis of the concept of landscape, offering an ontological approach. Our claim is that such a perspective is hardly ever assumed in philosophical aesthetics, even if theories of landscape appreciation are in fact based on tacit ontological assumptions. We argue that having an explicit ontology of landscapes is important, for aesthetic theories of their appreciation are often attacked in terms of the problems caused by their tacit ontologies. Therefore, we sketch an “Experience Ontology” that serves as an alternative to the ontologies implied in the two best known aesthetic approaches to landscapes. We contend that a landscape should not be conceived of as an object or view but as a way of experiencing one’s surroundings, and we argue that our theory is not only free from the shortcomings of the two dominant theories but that it also corresponds better to everyday intuitions.	DOI 10.4000/estetica.7426	Rde75_10-AndrzejewskiSalwa	7,00 €	Rde75_10-AndrzejewskiSalwa"

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

INSTAGRAM