Sustainable Development Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) Published online 12 November 2007 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.

com) DOI: 10.1002/sd.342

Origin and Development of Ecological Philosophy and Environmental Ethics and Their Impact on the Idea of Sustainable Development
Wodzimierz Tyburski* Wodzimierz Tyburski, Institute of Philosophy, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Poland
ABSTRACT A critical review of environmental philosophy and environmental ethics is discussed in relation to the idea of sustainable development. The article makes reference to 19th century inuences that inspired thought orientated towards protecting the natural environment, and then presents the stages of the development of ecological philosophy, the main standpoints and their representatives. The main features of Polish eco-philosophical thought are presented together with an outline of the most signicant achievements of these disciplines on a global scale. The inuence of environmental philosophy and ethics on social aspects of sustainable development is also presented. Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Received 5 Febuary 2007; revised 7 May 2007; accepted 22 June 2007 Keywords: ecological philosophy; environmental ethics; anthropocentrism; biocentrism; holism; sustainable development

Introduction

various ways to halt adverse processes. We need varied technical and technological actions, an active effort in many scientic elds (natural sciences, economics and law) and on the part of organizers of social life, people representing different spheres and interests but united by a common idea, the struggle to halt the damage to the human natural environment. These disciplines possess a large number of possibilities to raise consciousness, creating attitudes, justications and motivations. This eld of activity includes environmental protection, also dened as ecological humanism. An integral component is philosophicalethical thought together with other disciplines of the humanities: ecopedagogy, eco-psychology, eco-aesthetics or eco-theology. They complement the natural sciences, economics and law, with a range of new components, including philosophical, axiological and educational dimensions. Therefore, for example, on the one hand, ecological philosophy strives to show the collection of philosophical, cultural and world-view conditions that in the modern era have generated radically utilitarian positivisttechnocratic thought and whose practical consequences have proved to be highly
* Correspondence to: Prof. Dr. Hab. Wodzimierz Tyburski, Institute of Philosophy, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Fosa Staromiejska 1a, 87-100 Torun, Poland. E-mail: tyburski@maius.uni.torun.pl
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

HE CONTINUING DESTRUCTION OF THE WORLD OF NATURE AND THE ECOLOGICAL CRISIS COMPEL US to intensify and integrate the organizational efforts of whole communities and search for

Ecological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development

101

dangerous for the natural world. On the other hand, it makes its own signicant contribution to the work of building new thought about humans and the natural world, aiming to project a vision of the future and to build a model of civilization orientated towards ecological needs. This is best seen in the unquestionable contribution of ecological philosophy to the construction of the foundations of the idea rst of eco-development and now of sustainable development. In turn, ethical reection presents and justies the desirable hierarchy of values and enriches inordinately all attempts to answer the fundamental questions: how should people behave towards their natural environment and why should they act in this way? With this aim it wishes to develop an axiological model of preferences in the relations between humans and nature, in order that moral values should represent an important criterion regulating these relations. They should also temper potential conicts between human activities and nature and enable such choices to be made that would favour the preservation of ecological balance in situations where humans intervene in the world of nature, adapting it for their needs. There is no doubt that the situation in which the modern world and civilization have found themselves represents a great challenge for philosophy and ethics. There is the need to refer theoretically to global processes, phenomena and tendencies, to reveal their mechanisms and also to engage actively in the stream of practical actions. The consciousness of the need to protect the nature is conrmed by philosophicalethical reection by the effects of its results. Both ecological philosophy and environmental ethics have clearly dened the object of their research interests and have already achieved a high level of methodological self-awareness. They are also contributing signicantly to the theory and practice of ecological education as well as to specic actions in the sphere of protecting the natural world.

International Perspective
Ecological philosophy and environmental ethics, together with their object of interest, were established in a reasonably mature form in the 1960s and 1970s, mainly in the United States. Since then their rapid and dynamic development has been visible. In order to reach the earliest sources and the emergence of ecological thought, we need to go back to the second half of the 19th century, when such a trend appeared in American literature, gaining a relatively high degree of resonance. It found followers among representatives of New England transcendentalism a literaryphilosophical movement with a diverse ideological provenance, in which the most important positions were held by such thinkers as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, Theodore Parker and Margaret Fuller. Their works give voice to the idea of respect for nature, which especially in the works of Emerson and Thoreau stands out so distinctly that they remained in public consciousness not only for their contemporaries great apologists for and lovers of nature. Emerson (Gromczyn ski, 1992) openly criticized the purely utilitarian treatment of nature. His philosophy proclaimed the idea of harmonious accord and interdependence of the natural and human worlds. The philosopher was convinced that nature could become a kind of teacher for people, since they can perceive its internal order and harmony. Without opposing peoples technical intervention in the world of nature, Emerson believes that it is of much greater value when we forego the attitude of dominance and experience a fusion with nature and become conscious of our kinship and substantial identication with everything that surrounds us. This aim is unattainable for those who limit themselves to narrowly utilitarian actions and what is called scientic reason. What is needed is a change in looking at ourselves and at what surrounds us, embracing with a new look our existence in its substantial unity with the world. It is Emersons belief that language is of particular importance in revealing the true nature of existence. It owes its peculiar properties to its various dimensions. Language only fulls this kind of role
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd

102

W. Tyburski

when we discover its deepest meanings, which are based on expressing the primary text of nature, forgotten in everyday life. By discovering the primary text of nature we can begin an authentic dialogue with it. This skill of communing with nature and conducting his own interpretation of dialogue with it was mastered by H. D. Thoreau, author of the famous and excellent essays collected under the title Walden, or Life in the Woods. In these essays he expressed his love for wild nature, declaring like the majority of people I am drawn to both the sublime and the sphere of the primitive and the wild, but I respect them both equally. I love wildness no less than goodness and he added goodness is the only investment that never disappoints (Thoreau, 1854). His literary output, full of admiration for nature, was also a kind of manifesto declared in defence of wild nature. Thoreaus book and Emersons philosophical thought became the source of inspiration for the world view of many creators and thinkers fascinated by this idea: Chekhov, Tolstoy, Gandhi; and above all it formed the American mentality. Among others to nd themselves under the spell of these ideas was John Muir, an eminent activist in the eld of environmental protection, particularly regarding areas of wilderness in the United States. He was the precursor of the idea of the protection of wild nature and a eulogist for wilderness, who called for these areas to be left untouched by human activity and declared the superiority of wild animals over domestic ones. He thus initiated, on a practical level, the position in the matter of environmental protection that is dened as preservation, whose supporters strive to preserve the environment and to leave it in a state changed as little as possible, then formulating an additional postulate the protection of nature, particularly wild nature, for its own sake. These ideas also touched the style of Aldo Leopold, considered to be the father of ecological philosophy and environmental ethics in its various versions. It is he who has most expressively presented the main principle of the idea of preservation. It dismisses the belief in the purely ancillary role of nature towards humankind and does not accept utilitarianism because it confers value on nature only to the degree to which it is a requisite of human prosperity and benet. Instead he expressed the view that the interests of non-human beings should be taken into consideration for their own sake and not only when they serve human aims and needs. Nature should be considered as an ethical good to which humans should show commitment. He emphasized that nature as a whole, and not selected wild areas as Muir postulated, had a value in its own right and had the right to exist and to last in the form most appropriate for it. The duty of humans is to respect this fact. This is why in his well known book A Sand County Almanac (Leopold, 1948) he presents the proposition of the so-called land ethic. This ethic widens the borders of the biotic community. He proposes a new way of thinking, which from the start poses the question not only as to what is protable from the economic point of view, but also what is ethically and aesthetically right. The correct answer to this, Leopold claims, is based on the conviction that what is right is what benets the preservation of the coherence, stability and beauty of the biotic community. What is not right, on the other hand, is what is not benecial for this. Leopold criticizes the system of nature protection based exclusively on economic benets while ignoring many elements of the earths community that have no utilitarian values but are indispensable for it to function healthily. Here ethics plays an unusually far-reaching role, connected with the obligation of protecting all component parts of the biotic community. Leopolds thoughts from his book A Sand County Almanac played an inspirational role in establishing this style of thinking, which generated the new disciplines of reection of ecological philosophy and environmental ethics. With some justication, then, Leopold is widely recognized as the precursor of these disciplines. The ideas of the amateur philosopher and forester had enthusiastic followers but were also the subject of criticism on the part of those who practised philosophy professionally and indicated the lack of theoretical justication and found inconsistencies in his thinking, especially the committing of the naturalistic error. Leopolds heir and continuator, the academic philosopher J. Baird Callicott
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd

Ecological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development

103

(1989), creatively developed the thinking of the author of the land ethic, and thanks to his professional preparation was able to avoid the mistakes and transgressions of which his predecessor was accused. Callicott provided the philosophical bases for the holistically orientated ecological philosophy. His unquestionable achievement is the creative development of the idea of the ethic of communities, its theoretical justication and also the construction of a new way of thinking called the ecocentric paradigm. For this philosopher, holistic ethics is not only connected with certain obligations towards Earth, but also requires sacrices for its good, analogously as we take obligations upon ourselves which are often bound up with renouncement towards our family, friends and country. Callicotts views became the direct inspiration for the creative activity of one of the most eminent representatives of holistic ecological philosophy, Holmes Rolston III, a person of great merit in the global ecological movement (Rolston, 1989). He strived to construct a naturalistic concept of environmental ethics, while he based the relations of humans and nature by evoking the category of responsibility. He devoted much space in his considerations to the issue of values, including an analysis of the weighty and difcult subject of the transition from values to facts and the search for a way to avoid the naturalistic error. He indicated the link between facts and values, but at the same time, in accordance with traditional ethics, he emphasized that such a transition is basically impossible from the point of view of formal logic. He developed the idea of holistic philosophy with the primacy of the good of whole ecosystems over individual good. He evoked the principles and rules that should be followed by politics with regard to the natural environment, taken on the local and global scale; he analysed business relations, especially business ethics with regard to the natural environment. In this context, he spoke on many signicant issues included in considerations on sustainable development. Rolstons considerations are representative of environmental philosophy and ethics in their holistic version (Rolston, 1989). These disciplines focus on whole ecosystems and in practical postulates to place the good of the whole above the good of individual beings. This fact differentiates Rolstons views from the biocentrically orientated environmental ethics of Paul W. Taylor, which is simultaneously individualistic ethics. In this, the way of looking at the problem of the environment through the prism of the good of individual beings is predominant. Taylors concept, called respect for nature (Taylor, 1986), is one of the best known versions of environmental ethics. The attitude of respect for nature should result from the conviction that every organism, population and community of living beings possesses good (welfare) and intrinsic value, which means that we can think of them as deserving moral treatment and commitment. According to the creator of the respect for nature ethic, as long as we consider an organism, population or group of organisms as entities with innate value, we believe that they can never be treated as objects or things whose whole value depends on fullling an instrumental function simply because they are members of the earths living community. For this reason, achieving their good is something intrinsically valuable. Thus, if we say that an entity has an innate value, then that means that its good deserves to be the object of reection of moral subjects, and also that the achievement of its good has an intrinsic value of itself, because of it. On the other hand, the anthropocentric version of the environmental protection ethic, whose best known representative is John Passmore, rejects the moral status of non-human beings and thereby the widening of the scope of morality (Passmore, 1980). It sees no need to construct any new ethics and believes that it is possible to solve environmental problems caused by civilization within the framework of the existing tradition. The duties formulated on the basis of anthropocentrically orientated environmental ethics have moral character only because of their nal receiver, so humankind. Within this way of thinking, these duties and actions lose their moral character when their only and direct addressee is the environment. We can say, therefore, according to the concept maintained in the spirit of anthropocentrism, that human actions regarding the natural environment and its non-human inhabitants are actually dependent on whether they full two criteria, namely (a) whether their consequences are
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd

104

W. Tyburski

benecial (or detrimental) for human prosperity and (b) whether they comply (or do not comply) with the system of norms that protect human rights. Thus we can have obligations that concern the natural ecosystems and biocentric communities of our planet, but these obligations are always based on the fact that how we treat these ecosystems and living communities can only affect the realization of human values and rights. Another, and one of the most popular trends in current environmental thought, is deep ecology, whose name stresses the fact that in its postulates it decidedly exceeds the way of thinking characteristic of shallow ecology. The creator of deep ecology, the eminent Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess, reasons that the essence of ecological thinking is the posing of deep questions about what society, what system of education, what religions are most benecial for life on this planet as a whole, and he adds that social and humanist knowledge cannot diverge from the answers to these questions (Seed et al., 1988). Deep ecology expresses a decided criticism of the positivisttechnocratic model of the development of civilization, aggressive market economics and the consumer lifestyle. It proposes new ecological thinking, the concept of green politics aimed at protecting and defending the wealth and variety of forms of life and in the sphere of economics green economics responsible for action on behalf of economically self-sufcient bioregions and lifestyles motivated by postulates of restrained consumerism. Deep ecology, speaking in the name of and on behalf of all forms of life, seeks a better form for the relations between people and other living beings inhabiting Earth. Its supporters contend that it is a misconception of the human race that we identify all values with human values. Therefore, they believe that raw materials and other natural goods are not only for people, but also for all living beings. In scientic study they place a broad denition of science and holistic thought before a narrow denition and analytical thought. They demand deep and radical change in the consciousness of society. At the basis of this change should be the conviction that forms of life do not form pyramids with our species at the summit, but rather a circle in which everything is linked with everything. Among other philosophers we will mention A. Atteld, W. S. Clark, W. K Franken, E. Goldsmith, E. C. Hargrove, J. Lovelock, M. Midgley, R. Nash, T. Regan, B. Rollin, J. Sweed and others.

Polish Perspective
In Poland ecological philosophy and environmental ethics became the object of serious interest and studies at the end of the 1980s. One of the rst papers was On the Idea of Ecological Humanism (Tyburski, 1990). The majority of these publications referred directly to the views of the aforementioned representatives of eco-philosophical thought, developing them creatively, indicating their own standpoints and ways of thinking. In 1992, Marek M. Bonenbergs book Environmental Ethics: Assumptions and Directions was published (Bonenberg, 1992), which was the rst very competent presentation of the main standpoints in environmental ethics in Polish literature. The author, referring to the vast literature, analyses the concepts of Tom Regan, extending moral rights to non-human beings, the individualistic ethics of Robin Atteld, the ethic of respect for nature by Paul W. Taylor, the land ethic by Aldo Leopold and J. Baird Callicott, deep ecology, the ecocentric theory of Holmes Rolston III, the ethical implications of the Gaia hypothesis, Edward Goldsmiths biosphere ethics and eco-ethics by Henryk Skolimowski. In 1993, the next publication devoted to the problem of environmental ethics was published, a book by the present author entitled Unite with the Earth. Around the Issues of Ecological Humanism (Tyburski, 1993). Alongside a presentation of the main standpoints in environmental ethics, the author focuses above all on highlighting and analysing the axiological, deontological and educational dimension of the new discipline. He presents a system of values elaborated on its basis (eco-values), a set of norms
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd

Ecological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development

105

and principles of behaviour and a programme of ecological education as seen from the perspective of environmental ethics. An important event, that had repercussions on the further development of environmental ethics and ecological philosophy, was the Sixth Convention of Polish Philosophy in Torun in 1995. For the rst time, , a section was created devoted to the issues of environmental ethics, eco-philosophy and bioethics. The result of the very fruitful deliberations was the publication Eco-Philosophy and Bioethics (Tyburski, 1996a), which included papers by Z. Pia/tek, W. Tyburski, J. M. Dol e/ga, Z. Hull, A. Papuzin and others. ski were drawn on in a further collective work, The issues dealt with in the aforementioned publication the fruit of a symposium in which researchers interested in the connections between ecology, economics and ethics presented the results of their investigations. This fact is highlighted by the title of the work: EconomicsEcologyEthics (Tyburski, 1996b). The directions of the considerations presented in it provide a catalogue of far-reaching questions. How should people behave towards their natural surroundings and why should they behave thus? How far is economic rationality compatible with ecological rationality? In which direction should the economic transformation go in order that the effects of actions serving economic purposes should not cause negative ecological consequences? What catalogue of values can link ecological and economic policies? What elements form the contemporary ideology of environmental protection? The problem of ecological philosophy is the object of interest of Konrad Waloszczyk. His dissertation entitled The Ecological Crisis in the Light of Eco-Philosophy (Waloszczyk, 1996) deserves particular attention. In 1998, two important works were published devoted to environmental ethics. Zdzisl awa Pia/tek is the author of a very interesting dissertation entitled Environmental Ethics. A New Look at the Place of Humans in Nature (Pia/tek, 1998). In line with its title, it proposes a new look at non-human living beings that make up the Earths biosphere, taking a biocentric point of view and arguing for the recognition of the following points: not only humans, but also non-human living beings, have an intrinsic value; not only humans, but also non-human living beings, realize their characteristic vital values and know how to live in accordance with their own nature; not only humans, but also every living being, is a measure of those aspects of the environment with which it must cooperate in order to live. The biosphere should not be exploited and managed only from the point of view of human interests. The same year a collective work entitled Environmental Ethics. Theoretical and Practical Implications (Tyburski, 1998) was published, presenting the results of the rst national conference devoted to various aspects of environmental ethics. The conference gathered nearly all the researchers specializing in this discipline, who, despite theoretical and methodological differences, had the common conviction that what is happening at the meeting point of ethics and ecology is very signicant, and that the world of human relations with nature has a deep axiological dimension which requires theoretical reection and practical action. The works of Andrzej Papuzin also deserve attention. He proposed the interesting concept of culski turist ecological philosophy, which found its full expression in the book Life-Science-Ecology. Introduction to Culturist Ecological Philosophy (Papuzin ski, 1998). By highlighting the social role of philosophy, culturist ecological philosophy transforms the problem of the natural environment into knowledge about the ecological difculties of contemporary culture; assimilation of this knowledge by society may transform the existing world. Different aspects of ecological ethics and philosophy have, for many years, been discussed and analysed by Zbigniew Hull; he pays particular attention to the philosophical foundations of sustainable
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd

106

W. Tyburski

development (Hull, 1995). The fullest expression and analysis of the ecological problem, however, is to be found in the works of Jzef M. Dol e/ga (1998). It is also worth noting that there have been attempts to construct an environmental ethic from the position of Christian thought. An example is the work by the priest Julisl aw L ukomski entitled An Attempt to Construct a Christian Ethic of the Natural Environment (L ukomski, 1999). Selected issues in priests Tadeusz Slipko and Andrzej environmental ethics are analysed from the same position by the Zwolin in the book entitled The Crossroads of Ecology (Slipko and Zwolin ski ski, 1999). Jan Wawrzyniak analyses the problems of environmental ethics from another, naturalistic position, in a vast dissertation, Theoretical Foundations of Naturalistic Environmental Ethics (Wawrzyniak, 2000), including a very lively, controversial discussion on the relations between humans and nature and what he calls a new look at the place and duties of humans in the world of nature. In turn, the problem of environmentalism is popularized by Wiesl aw Sztumski, while Andrzej Kiepas examines various aspects of the ecological problem from the perspective of technical philosophy. Artur Pawl owski speaks on the subject of humans responsibility for nature, referring to Hans Jonass concept of responsibility, James Lovelocks Gaia concept and Arne Naesss concept of deep ecology. Pawl owski is also the editor of two volumes of dissertations on the subject of philosophical and social conditions for sustainable development (Pawlowski 1999, 2003, 2004). A publication entirely devoted to environmental ethics and the popularization of its ideas is a collective work entitled Environmental Ethics as a Challenge for the 21st Century (Czartoszewski, 2002) the result of a conference organized by the Centre of Human Ecology and Bioethics at Cardinal Stefan Wyszyn University in Warsaw. ski A survey of the main standpoints in eco-ethics is provided by Ignacy S. Fiut in a book presenting the directions of environmentally friendly contemporary axiology (Fiut, 1999). In turn, a survey and analysis of the basic catalogue of the subjects of eco-philosophy are presented in the latest book by Stefan Konstan czak, mainly devoted to the needs of academic didactics, while philosophical premises found at the basis of the concept of sustainable development are analysed by Leszek Gawor. It should also be mentioned that in 1999 a collective work, that was also the rst academic textbook from the eld of ecological philosophy, was published under the title An Introduction to the Philosophical Problems of Ecology (Papuzin ski, 1999). The degree of advancement of research on eco-philosophical problems led to a rst attempt to sum up the achievements so far. Five authors undertook this task: K. L astowski, Z. Hull, W. Tyburski, J. M. Dole/ga and A. Papuzin ski. The second, signicantly being prepared; it also takes into account thebroadened and modied, edition of the book is currently output of Polish eco-philosophical and eco-ethical thought of the last dozen or more years. Of the latest publications worthy of note is an interesting monograph by L. S. Pyra devoted to the views of Holmes Rolston III (Pyra, 2003). The problem of ecological philosophy and environmental ethics is also found in the works of other authors, including W. Boloz, M. Ciszek, J. De/bowski, G. Francuz, J. Jaronie, E. Kos micki, A. Latawiec, D. Liszewski, Z. L epko, Z. Migus, A. Skowron ski, Z. Wrblewski and S. Zie/ba. Let us add that ecological philosophy and environmental ethics at last have their own journal, Problems of Eco-Development (edited by A. Pawlowski), and that these disciplines are systematically taught at many Polish universities. In this very brief review of the standpoints, trends and orientations of ecological philosophy and environmental ethics, we must mention the works of Henryk Skolimowski. His writing has found a permanent place in eco-philosophical thought. This philosopher says that the paradigm of mechanistic and positivist thought, which is at the basis of the developmental trends of modern civilization, provides a one-sided interpretation of reality. This is predatory thinking regarding nature and it is in it that we should perceive the causes not only of ecological disasters but also social and ideological disasters. The
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd

Ecological Philosophy, Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development

107

direction of creative transformations should lead, according to Skolimowski, from mechanistic, analytical and pragmatic understanding to ecological understanding, which is not a negation of the value of progress, nor of the value of science, but another way of reading reality, another way of perceiving humans in the whole scheme of nature. Instead of atomistic tunnel vision, Skolimowski proposes a holistic vision one that gives a proper perspective of the wholes, within the framework of which the place of its individual fragments can be revealed. It is to such a concept of discovering the world that ecological consciousness fully corresponds, being a holistic, integrating, therapeutic consciousness par excellence, and at the same time being in opposition to mechanistic consciousness. There is no saving the Earth without a change in our consciousness. If we wish to declare peace with the Earth, then above all we must change our predatory, parasitic, materialistic consciousness to a reverential one. At the basis of the new consciousness lies the assumption that the world is a sanctuary. In Skolimowskis opinion, this idea redenes humans relationship with the surrounding natural reality and reveals a new optic of varied relations with it, based on veneration, respect and reverence. Such an attitude is at the same time an axiological principle of ecological ethics. The role of one of the supreme values in this ethic is taken on by responsibility responsibility for ones own life, the prosperity of future generations, the environment and the future of the whole planet. In the world regarded as a sanctuary, we must take the role of custodian and carer, behaving with respect and love for the whole of life and the environment. It is this philosophers belief that, until now, our way of thinking was dominated by perceiving the world from an economic perspective. What we should do is to see the reality surrounding us through ecological spectacles. Today, to think well, says Skolimowski, is to think ecologically. This concerns technical, political and even religious thinking. Therefore, ecological philosophy is a matrix of a new understanding of the cosmos and of a proper cooperation with nature and the whole world. Skolimowski is convinced that the ideas he proposes are able to provide the proper inspiration for all those who are looking for sense in a world threatened by civilization. They are presented in many publications, among them in Hope is the Mother of the Wise or Living Philosophy (Skolimowski, 1989, 1993). Also in Poland, the problem of ecological philosophy and environmental ethics is an area where academic discussion of various options, standpoints and directions is conducted. It is not possible to present the wealth of discussion here, but as an example let us focus on a few selected matters. In the area of environmental ethics, discussions and polemics continue mainly between followers of anthropocentrism and representatives of weak anthropocentrism together with those who question the homocentric point of view, opting for biocentrism. The objects of heated debate and sometimes trenchant polemics are the various views on the place of humans in the universe, on the different perceptions of a supreme value and theoretical questions of justication, also through various judgements on contemporary culture and civilization, as well as the concept of the development of the world and the vision of the future.

Conclusion
Despite differences revealed between individual viewpoints, there are also many common areas. There is no doubt that the representatives of all the directions in environmental ethics are convinced of the need to broaden the ethical value and to subject human activity in nature to a moral evaluation. In addition, all agree on the role of ethics in the ecological education of society, and all indicate the need to build systems of values (eco-values) and moral codes aimed at environmental problems. They also stress the importance of forming ecological thought, sensibilities, conscience and an ecological attitude as indispensable elements of an ethical protection of the natural and human environment. They are also united in a more general way by the desire to diagnose the causes of the ecological crisis that the modern world is experiencing, to elaborate the best concepts to solve this and to construct such a
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd

108

W. Tyburski

philosophy of development that would take into account both the needs of humans and the needs of nature. This is where the idea of sustainable development has its origin.

References
. Bonenberg M. 1992. Etyka S rodowiskowa. Zal ozenia i Kierunki. UJ: Cracow. Essays in Environmental Philosophy. State University of New York Press: New Callicott JB. 1989. In Defense of the Land Ethic. York. Czartoszewski JW (ed.). 2002. Etyka S rodowiskowa Wyzwaniem XXI Wieku. UKSW: Warsaw. . Dole/ga JM. 1998. Czl owiek w Zagrozonym S rodowisku. ATK: Warsaw. Fiut IS. 1999. Ekoetyki. Kierunki Rozwoju Aksjologii Wspl czesnej Przyjaznej S rodowisku. Abrys: Cracow. Gromczyn M. 1992. Codziennos c i Absolut w Filozoi Ralpha Waldo Emersona. UL : L dz ski . Hull Z. 1995. Filozoa i przyrodoznawstwo w ksztaltowaniu mys lenia ekologicznego. In Czlowiek i S rodowisko. Dyscypliny Humanistyczne i Ekologia, Tyburski W (ed.). UMK: Torun 1929. ; Leopold A. 1948/1987. A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There. Oxford University Press: New York. L 1999. Prba Zbudowania Chrzes cijanskiej Etyki S rodowiska Naturalnego. PAT: Cracow. . ukomski J.A. 1998. Z ycie-Nauka-Ekologia. Prolegomena do Kulturalistycznej Filozoi Ekologii. WU WSP: Bydgoszcz. Papuzin ski Papuzin A (ed.). 1999. Wprowadzenie do Filozocznych Problemw Ekologii. WU WSP: Bydgoszcz. ski Passmore JA. 1980. Mans Responsibility for Nature. Ecological Problems and Western Traditions. Duckworth: London. Pawl owski A. 1999. Odpowiedzialnos c za Przyrode/. PL: Lublin. . . Pawl owski A (ed.) 2003. Filozoczne, Ekonomiczne, Inzynierskie i Przyrodnicze Uwarunkowania Zrwnowazonego Rozwoju. PL: Lublin. . Pawlowski A (ed.) 2004. Filozoczne, Spol eczne i Ekonomiczne Uwarunkowania Zrwnowazonego Rozwoju. PL: Lublin. Z. 1998. Etyka Srodowiskowa. Nowe Spojrzenie na Miejsce Czl owieka w Przyrodzie. UJ: Cracow. Pia/tek Pyra LS. 2003. Environment and Values. Holmes Rolston IIIs Environmental Philosophy. AR: Cracow. Rolston H III. 1989. Philosophy Gone Wild. Prometheus: Loughton. Seed J, Macy J, Fleming P, Naess A. 1988. Thinking Like A Mountain. Towards a Council of All Beings. New Society: Philadelphia, PA. Skolimowski H. 1989. Nadzieja Matka/ Ma/drych, Eseje o Ekologii. BEETPFE: Warsaw. . . Skolimowski H. 1993. Filozoa Z yja/ca. Ekolozoa Jako Drzewo Z ycia. Pusty Oblok: Warsaw. . Slipko T, Zwolin A. 1999. Rozdroza Ekologii. WAM: Cracow. ski Taylor PW. 1986. Respect for Nature. A Theory of Environmental Ethics. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ. Thoreau HD. 1854. Walden, or Life in the Woods. http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/205 [31 December 2006]. Tyburski W. 1990. O Idei Humanizmu Ekologicznego. TKSK: Warsaw. Tyburski W. 1993. Pojednac Sie/ z Ziemia/. W Kre/gu Zagadnien Humanizmu Ekologicznego. UMK: Torun . Tyburski W (ed.). 1996a. Ekolozoa i Bioetyka. UMK: Torun . Tyburski W (ed.). 1996b. EkonomiaEkologiaEtyka. UMK: Torun . Tyburski W (ed.). 1998. Etyka S rodowiskowa. Teoretyczne i Praktyczne Implikacje. UMK: Torun . Waloszczyk K. 1996. Kryzys Ekologiczny w S wietle Ekolozoi. PL : L dz . Wawrzyniak J. 2000. Teoretyczne Podstawy Neonaturalistycznej Bioetyki S rodowiskowej. UAM: Poznan .

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Sust. Dev. 16, 100108 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/sd