[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 434 KB, 1332x850, Rassvet.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16089397 No.16089397 [Reply] [Original]

How do I get into eco-philosophy?

>> No.16090012

>>16089397
The obvious pick would be to read Walden, however if you want a fresher approach I would suggest this.
Read "Post-Scarcity Anarchism" by Murray Bookchin and after that read "The Philosophy of Social Ecology" also by Bookchin.

>> No.16090029

>>16089397
Assuming you can meet the dress code, you will also need to learn the password and the handshake.

>> No.16090073

>>16089397
Eco-pĥilosophy is already an error. It subsists on the disjunction between man and nature, a structural difference staged as necessary and objective (where really the imagining of the difference that is "nature" as real is imaginary) which calls triumphantly for a return to ""nature"", a moral valuation of nature over man, meaningfully justifying itself with the discourse of pollution, of the effects of civilization on the "needs" of man, on the "unnaturalness" of civilization.

>> No.16090938

>>16089397
Bump

>> No.16090970

>>16090073
Not necessarily. In-fact most contemporary eco-philosophers reject the nature-man made binary. A lot has changed in the field since the 70’s.

>> No.16090981

>>16090012
Not OP but I appreciate the recs anon

>> No.16090990

>>16089397
The Holy Bible. Man was made Gardener and husbandman.

>> No.16090999

>>16089397
Go outside
Teddy Roosevelt style masculine environmentalism is cool
Primitivism, anarchism and liberal style consumerist environmentalism are not

>> No.16091014
File: 601 KB, 1813x2777, 9788202369606.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16091014

>>16090999
Has anyone here read this lad?

>> No.16091027

>>16090981
Just doing my duty anon.

>> No.16091048

>>16091027
Cheers, lad.

>> No.16091285
File: 3.50 MB, 1028x1580, 6128ED99-0CBF-4241-9C5E-708A2B7F1F44.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16091285

>> No.16091299

Ignore all those "dude we have to go back to the stone age to protect the earth" people. We have to move forward to a society that is compatible with ecology while also not trying to ignore progress

>> No.16091331
File: 75 KB, 406x612, 59AA1FFC-518E-46D2-82AD-C50471470B54.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16091331

Also should include Mollison, Holmgren, Stamets and this

>> No.16091390
File: 302 KB, 1043x1036, Heidegger filling a bucket with water.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16091390

>>16091299
Technology has been nothing but a net negative for civilization.