Recommended Chinese-Language Bibliography on Environmental Philosophy

9,972 characters2012.04.20

In discussion class, Liu Ping asked me to recommend books related to environmental ethics or eco-socialist thought, so I整理了一下 and am posting it here.

In 2005, when I was a freshman, a number of courses in environmental ethics and environmental philosophy happened to be offered at the same time. I took three or five of them in one go, and then put effort into the papers as a whole too (when I submitted them I explained the situation of “multiple submissions”). The end result was that I skimmed through dozens of books on environmental philosophy then available on the market, and along with other reference works, more than a hundred volumes in all, and wrote an eighty-thousand-character booklet, “Ecological Philosophy.”

I posted that paper on the blog, but I do not recommend it, because both the thinking and the writing at the time were far too immature. The significance of that paper is that from then on I became quite adept at handling large numbers of citations when writing papers. Of course, even if the thought was immature, the reading at the time did have some influence; although I no longer remember the details, I at least retain some impressions of which of those books were good and which were not. After finishing that paper, I once imagined that my future academic direction would begin from environmental issues, so over the following years I still kept paying attention to books on environmental philosophy; for example, in the past two years several important series have appeared. But I have not read many of the books published in the last two years, after all, because my main line of research has shifted to technics phenomenology.

Of course, I have stated many times that my turn of interest toward philosophy of science, history of science, and philosophy of technology can all be regarded as an extension of my inquiry into environmental issues. Environmental issues are a master theme in my academic horizon.

Although I have not directly focused on environmental issues in the past two years, as my academic horizon has expanded, I have arrived at some new positions on environmental issues. For example, back then I set my topic as “ecological philosophy”; at the time I felt that the word “ecological” was better, because it includes human beings and concerns the relation between humans and nature, whereas “environment” seems external to human beings, something opposed to them. But on reflection, perhaps the word “environment” is actually better. The comprehensive concept of “ecology,” which includes the relation between humans and nature, seems more inclined to give rise to a kind of “God’s-eye view”: a perspective that encompasses the whole, but precisely for that reason has no real foothold of its own. “Environment,” by contrast, is always surrounding us, those of us who actually live within it, and thus has more of a kind of immediacy, sensibility, and practical actuality. In addition, the word “environment” can ultimately be connected with the concept of “environment” in the “medium-content-environment” triad of media ecology that I introduced. Although media ecology should literally also be translated as ecology, the concept of “environment” does indeed play a pivotal role. I even seriously thought several times about whether to change the title “media ontology” into “environment phenomenology.”

On the other hand, I have begun to return to “environmental ethics” in a new way. At the time I was not especially convinced by the concept of “environmental ethics”; of course, even now I still do not identify with the Western mainstream approach to environmental ethics, but now I am trying to introduce “virtue ethics” to rebuild an approach to environmental ethics. The focus of this kind of ethics is no longer “intrinsic value,” but rather “the good,” “goodness.”

Uh, enough nonsense; let’s get to the point and list the books:

Hollis Rolston: 《Philosophy Gone Wild》

Hollis Rolston: 《Environmental Ethics》

— Rolston is a relatively influential “environmental ethicist” with a certain degree of originality and readability. As far as the classic primary literature in “environmental ethics” is concerned, Rolston is someone one ought to read. The introduction of the concept of “wilderness” is extremely important; although Rolston’s reflection on wilderness does not seem sufficiently profound, at least he raises the question.

Albert Schweitzer: 《Reverence for Life: The Basic Writings from Fifty Years》

— Schweitzer is Shi Huaizhe, also translated as Shi Huaizhe, Shi Huai-ze, Schweitz, and so on and so on. When I was reading those dozens of related books back then, I once tallied it and found that this person’s name appeared in at least a dozen different transliterations… But Shi Huaizhe was a very famous legendary figure: he held doctorates in philosophy, theology, and medicine, and he was also an organist who loved Bach. From his thirties onward he practiced medicine in Africa, traveling intermittently through Europe to lecture and perform, raising funds for hospitals in Africa. He wrote many works on philosophy, theology, music, and ecological issues, including a manuscript of 《A History of Chinese Thought》. In his later years he was awarded the Peace Prize and hailed as a “saint.” This little booklet is an excerpt of his thought on reverence for life and some speeches and discussions on ecological issues, and is worth a look. The concept of “reverence for life” is utterly different from the later environmental ethicists’ claim that “life has intrinsic value.” The concept of “reverence” still awaits further development in environmental philosophy.

Nash: 《The Rights of Nature》

— This is also one of the most classic works in environmental ethics, centrally expounding the so-called “ethical expansionism” — the object of ethics expands from aristocrats to men, then further to include women, then Black people… According to this developmental path, next we should gradually incorporate animals, plants, and ecosystems. I am extremely opposed to this kind of line of thought — not opposed to the conclusion that ethics should care about animals, but opposed to its line of reasoning. But after all, this is the mainstream approach in environmental ethics; if one is to criticize it, one must first understand it, and this book is a must-read.

Donald Worster: 《Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas》

— You can ignore the main title; the significance of this book lies in its subtitle, “A History of Ecological Ideas,” which tells the background and development of ecological thought and ecology itself (mainly limited to the United States).

Serge Moscovici: 《The Revelation of Nature: Reflections on the Ecological Movement》

— This book reviews and reflects on the origins and development of the ecological movement. Clearly, Moscovici is deeply worried about the ecological crisis and the disenchantment of nature, but he also does not wholly agree with many of the ecologist positions. He has another book that has also been translated into Chinese: 《A Society Against Nature》. He opposes simplistic slogans like “return to nature”; nature and humanity are originally a relation of opposition rather than fusion without distinction, but at the same time the two mutually constitute each other. I can no longer remember his specific arguments now, but the book is very thought-provoking.

Edited by He Huaihong: 《Ecological Ethics — Spiritual Resources and Philosophical Foundations》

— This book organized many domestic scholars to write different chapters, including contributions from Wu laoshi and Su laoshi. It is quite comprehensive in scope and written quite well. Although new books have appeared one after another in recent years, I believe that among Chinese overview-style works, this one is still one of the best.

Eugene Hargrove: 《Foundations of Environmental Ethics》

Brian Baxter: 《An Introduction to Ecologism》

——These are two volumes from Yang Tongjin’s edited series “Toward Ecological Civilization,” published in 2007, and the overall quality is pretty good. By this time I had already passed my period of intense interest in environmental philosophy, and I have not read much of this series; I only flipped through both of these books, and they are still readable. I haven’t read the other one, Feminism and the Domination of Nature, but perhaps it is good as well.

Lei Yi: Research on Deep Ecological Thought

——Research on deep ecology in China is still very limited; this is a rare and valuable book.

Carolyn Merchant: The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution

——Translated personally by Professor Wu, so of course it is worth reading; it is a classic work in feminist history of science. Unfortunately, I read it too roughly back then and have still never gone back to read it properly.

Meng Peiyuan: Humans and Nature—A Chinese Philosophical View of Ecology

——It talks at length about the ecological thought of the ancient Chinese, and always gives one a somewhat forced and far-fetched feeling. But if one really must talk about it, then among the books I have read, this is probably the best one.

Peng Feng: Perfect Nature: The Philosophical Foundations of Contemporary Environmental Aesthetics

——Written by the reliable professor from my department’s aesthetics teaching and research office, so it is still worth reading. Environmental aesthetics is another highly promising path, distinct from environmental ethics, though I am not familiar with it. In recent years an “Environmental Aesthetics Translation Series” has also come out, for example Living in the Landscape: Toward an Environmental Aesthetics, which I have not read, but it still looks quite reliable.

Joachim Radkau: Nature and Power: A Global Environmental History

——This is not directly related to environmental philosophy, but it is an excellent work of environmental history, and very inspiring to read.

Peter Singer and Tom Regan, eds.: Animal Rights and Human Obligations

——This book only came out in 2010, but it is obviously very useful. Singer and Regan are the two major representative figures in animal-rights thought. Of course, if one wants to understand their ideas, one can also read their monographs directly, such as Animal Liberation and The Case for Animal Rights, but this anthology is more convenient to read. After all, I do not very much agree with this approach; if one only wants to get acquainted with it, this anthology is quite good.

Lu Shuyuan, ed.: Nature and the Humanities: An Academic Resource Bank for Ecocriticism (Volumes I and II)

——These two thick volumes are like a big miscellany, gathering together all kinds of Western and Chinese statements concerning ecological issues. Everything is excerpted in small snippets, with continuous stretches of text amounting to no more than a page, so inevitably the original argumentative structure has been disrupted, resembling a kind of slogan-like exhibition. Of course, the resource collection is still relatively rich; if used to index other literature, it probably still has some value.

Emerson: On Nature

——I don’t need to introduce Emerson any further. It is a very small book, easy to read, and beyond its literary qualities it also contains certain thought-provoking insights worth digging into.

Aldo Leopold: A Sand County Almanac

——I won’t say much about literary works like Walden and Silent Spring. I’ll just mention this one at the end. It is actually Leopold’s A Sand County Almanac; this is the Taiwanese translation, and it seems slightly better. In terms of ideas, what mainly deserves attention is the final chapter, “The Land Ethic.”