“The Judeo-Christian Stewardship Attitude to Nature” was written by Patrick Dobel and was published in the anthology Environmental Ethics edited by Paul Pojman and Louis P. Pojman. This essay focuses on the Judeo-Christian aspects of caring for and respecting the environment. Dobel additionally begins by critiquing the argument of Lynn White Jr. and others, which holds that the Judeo-Christian religions destroyed the sacredness and encouraged the exploitation of nature. Dobel does a rather through job of refuting this argument and then raises many important points and develops a proper response in regards to the Christian lens of environmental ethics.
Dobel first raises the awareness of White’s argument to the audience. Dobel summarizes its
…show more content…
He pushed that humanity must respect the limits of the earth and its resources, keeping in mind that our actions should be guided by a concern for future generations (Dobel 632). These two points were communicated to the reader logically and coherently by citing and analyzing the Bible, notably much differently than White and others. Dobel spoke about how there is a covenant between the earth and God spoken about in the book of Genesis (631). When raising the awareness of this covenant, accountability seems to be at the core of his argument, knowing that humanity is responsible for the subsequent damage or repair of the earth and its resources. Dobel also looks at the New Testament of the Bible, which is where the stewarshipo imperative can been found, concluding that humanity “must never knowingly exhaust of ruin what has been given to us” (632). By incorporating this, Dobel is able to provide a look at environmental ethics from both the New and Old Testament lens. Though this does not seem purposeful, it is actually one of the most successful authorial moves Dobel makes. By evaluating both books, Dobel shields himself from criticism from those who may disagree with his claim and further strengthens his critique in the first part of the article against
Human beings have made much of purity and are repelled by blood, pollution, putrefaction (Snyder, 119). Nature is sacred. We are enjoying it and destroying it simultaneously. Sometimes it is easier to see charming things than the decomposition hidden in the “shade”.We only notice the beautiful side of nature, which are benefits that nature brings us: food, fresh air, water, landscapes. But we forget the other side, the rottenness of human destruction. That is how human beings create “the other side of the sacred”. We cut trees for papers, but we fail to recognize that the lack of trees is the lack of fresh air. Therefore, it is crucial to acknowledge “the other side of the
In the journal of Environmentalism as Religion, Paul H. Rubin discuss about how environmental is similar to religion. Rubin want everyone to know that the environment and religion are somehow similar in a way, which they both have belief system, creation stories and original sin.
Judeo-Christian beliefs as based on faith, and solely that. These groups and people do not need facts to back up their convictions, and each person will believe that “their way is the right way, [and that] everyone else is wrong,” (Page 6). One of the most commonly known stories from these religions is the story of the Garden of Eden, in which Eve and Adam both partake of the fruit of knowledge and thus for are cast out, bringing evil unto the world. Many believe, that these same connections can be made to our story as a human population as it was with Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were both sinners, and “we are all energy sinners,” (Page 2). Both groups of evildoers are then forced to gain their salvation, in our case, sustainability, or be forced
...that they believe is just and being ethical when concerning the environment, adherents will be rewarded by God. Humanity also benefits as, environmental ethics provided by the Christian teaching and beliefs allows communities to come together and discuss issues concerning the environment whilst being guided by their faith.
In his essay “Religion and Animal Rights," the writer Tom Regan maintains the place that animals are "subjects-of-a-life”, like humans. If we value all beings regardless of the degree of human rationality that are able to act, we must also attribute to animals or as it is called non-human animals as well. All practices involving abuse of animals should be abolished. The animals have an intrinsic value as humans, and stresses that Christian theology has brought unbridled land on the brink of an ecological catastrophe.
Christians consequently share a close relationship by means of the whole of aspects of creation, since in relation to the environment, its unbroken humanity, not unbroken nature, that's seen to be the problem. Stewardship in simple terms means managing someone else’s property. Christians proclaim that everything belongs to God, so as Christians, we need to have the attitude that our belongings are his belongings. As stewards, we have the responsibility of being in charge of the earth. We have been placed in charge and are responsible for whatever happens to it, even though it does not belong to us, as we all know it belongs to God.
Sagoff, Mark. “Animal Liberation and Environmental Ethics: Bad Marriage, Quick Divorce” in Environmental Ethics edited by David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott. Oxford University Press, New York. 2002. p. 38-44.
Sorrell, Roger D. Saint Francis of Assisi and Nature: Tradition and Innovation in Western Christian Attitudes toward the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Analyzing human obligation pertaining to all that is not man made, apart from humans, we discover an assortment of concerns, some of which have been voiced by philosophers such as Tom Regan, Peter Singer and Aldo Leopold. Environmentally ethical ideals hold a broad spectrum of perspectives that, not only attempt to identify a problem, but also focus on how that problem is addressed through determining what is right and wrong.
Wendell Berry and Fredrick Turner’s Views on Human Relationships with Nature. Many of the readings that we have studied in class have discussed the idea of human beings and our relationships with nature. The different authors we’ve studied and the works we’ve analyzed share different views on this relationship – a very interesting aspect to study. Human relationships with nature are truly timeless – nature can have the same effects on humans now as it did millions of years ago.
Though my theology forms a basis for my disagreement with Kaplan, it is not my sole basis in this paper. My theology shapes and influences my worldview. As a chaplain, this should not be a surprise to anyone. To simply argue a topic such as the environment strictly from a scriptural or theological standpoint would quickly lose a wide au...
A human induced global ecological crisis is occurring, threatening the stability of this earth and its inhabitants. The best path to address environmental issues both effectively and morally is a dilemma that raises concerns over which political values are needed to stop the deterioration of the natural environment. Climate change; depletion of resources; overpopulation; rising sea levels; pollution; extinction of species is just to mention a few of the damages that are occurring. The variety of environmental issues and who and how they affect people and other species is varied, however the nature of environmental issues has the potential to cause great devastation. The ecological crisis we face has been caused through anthropocentric behavior that is advantageous to humans, but whether or not anthropocentric attitudes can solve environmental issues effectively is up for debate. Ecologism in theory claims that in order for the ecological crisis to be dealt with absolutely, value and equality has to be placed in the natural world as well as for humans. This is contrasting to many of the dominant principles people in the contemporary world hold, which are more suited to the standards of environmentalism and less radical approaches to conserving the earth. I will argue in this essay that whilst ecologism could most effectively tackle environmental problems, the moral code of ecologism has practical and ethical defects that threaten the values and progress of anthropocentricism and liberal democracy.
God has not abandoned the world. It is His will that His design and our hope for it will be realized through our co-operation in restoring its original harmony. In our own time we are witnessing a growth of an ecological awareness which needs to be encouraged, so that it will lead to practical programs and initiatives. An awareness of the relationship between God and humankind brings a fuller sense of the importance of the relationship between human beings and the natural environment, which is God's creation and which God entrusted to us to guard with wisdom and love (cf.
“Unless humanity is suicidal, it should want to preserve, at the minimum, the natural life-support systems and processes required to sustain its own existence” (Daily p.365). I agree with scientist Gretchen Daily that drastic action is needed now to prevent environmental disaster. Immediate action and changes in attitude are not only necessary for survival but are also morally required. In this paper, I will approach the topic of environmental ethics from several related sides. I will discuss why the environment is a morally significant concern, how an environmental ethic can be developed, and what actions such an ethic would require to maintain and protect the environment.
Anthropocentrism is the school of thought that human beings are the single most significant entity in the universe. As a result, the philosophies of those with this belief reflect the prioritization of human objectives over the well-being of one’s environment. However, this is not to say that anthropocentric views neglect to recognize the importance of preserving the Earth. In fact, it is often in the best interests of humans to make concerted efforts towards sustaining the environment. Even from a purely anthropocentric point of view, there are three main reasons why mankind has a moral duty to protect the natural world.