Michael E. Zimmerman

The volume documents, and makes an original contribution to, an astonishing period in twentieth-century philosophy—the progress of Arne Naess's ecophilosophy from its inception to the present. It includes Naess's most crucial polemics with leading thinkers, drawn from sources as diverse as scholarly articles, correspondence, TV interviews and unpublished exchanges. The book testifies to the skeptical and self-correcting aspects of Naess's vision, which has deepened and broadened to include third world and feminist perspectives. Philosophical Dialogues is an essential addition to the literature on environmental philosophy

J. Baird Callicott seeks to resolve the problem of the intrinsic value of nature by utilizing a nondualistic paradigm derived from quantum theory. His approach is twofold. According to his less radical approach, quantum theory shows that properties once considered to be “primary” and “objective” are in fact the products of interactions between observer and observed. Values are also the products of such interactions. According to his more radical approach, quantum theory’s doctrine of internal relations is the model for the idea that everything is intrinsically valuable because the “I” is intrinsically valuable and related to everything else. I argue that humanity’s treatment of nature will become respectful only as humanity’s awareness evolves toward nondualism, and that such nondualistic awareness will not be produced by changes in scientific theory alone. Nevertheless, as Callicott suggests, such changes may be harbingers of evolutionary trends in human awareness. I conclude with a sketch of how nondualism, especially in its panentheistic version, provides the basis for environmental ethics.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 39.1 (2001) 155-156 [Access article in PDF] Terry Pinkard, Hegel: A Biography. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Pp. xx + 780. Cloth, $39.95. Having already made an important contribution to Hegel scholarship with his book, Hegel's Phenomenology: The Sociality of Reason, Terry Pinkard has now published an outstanding biography of the great nineteenth century thinker. Pinkard explains extraordinarily well the complicated philosophical and social contexts in which Hegel's philosophy arose and sheds abundant light on Hegel's personality, life, family, and times. This book validates the very idea of the "sociality of reason," by revealing that Hegel's ideas were shaped by his effort both to understand and to influence the contours of a fledgling modernity. Philosophers who may have been put off either by Hegel's philosophy, or else by the obscure rhetoric in which it is often couched, may give Hegel a second chance if they read this rewarding book.The text begins with a detailed account of Hegel's early life and family, including his familial status within the highly stratified society of the duchy of Württenberg. Pinkard's account of late eighteenth century German politics, including the role played by "estates" in social organization, greatly clarifies issues involved in Hegel's effort to reconcile the benefits of local particularism with those of Enlightenment universalism. Pinkard goes on to provide fascinating details about Hegel's life and personality as he traveled the long and frustrating road to a university professorship at Heidelberg, which he did not attain until 1816, when he was forty six. We learn of Hegel's love for good wine, social gatherings, card playing, opera, and theater. It was during a very busy seven year period (1809-1816), when he was rector of a gymnasium in Nuremberg, that Hegel wrote his Logic. The conservative politics, customs, and educational practices of Roman Catholic Bavaria grated on Hegel, who clearly preferred the political progressiveness of his own (thoroughly modernized) version of Lutheranism. Plagued throughout his career by stuttering and other symptoms of nervousness while lecturing, Hegel's fame grew so great in Berlin that his students regarded such symptoms as evidence of the great thinker's struggle with difficult concepts.Pinkard's book also offers an invaluable account of Hegel's relationships—both intellectual and personal, friendly and disputational—with the leading intellectuals of early nineteenth century Germany, including Hölderlin, Fichte, Schelling, Goethe, Schleiermacher, and many others. Pinkard succeeds brilliantly in explaining not only the philosophical debates of the day, including the rise of and resistance to German [End Page 155] idealism, but also how Hegel positioned his own thought in relation to that of his contemporaries. The book recounts complex debates that took place among authors now long forgotten, but who were at the time important, especially to the young Hegel, who was trying to establish himself professionally. Pinkard's excellent summaries of Hegel's major works, ranging from the Phenomenology to the late lectures on religion, reveal how they relate to the philosophical, cultural, social, political, and economic issues of the era. By closely examining Hegel's letters and unpublished works, and by scrutinizing remarks made about him by his contemporaries, Pinkard shows how strongly Hegel yearned to make a difference in the formation of the modern world.In addition to these and many other notable accomplishments, Pinkard's book also examines the various legends connected with Hegel's life. It was a letter written by Hegel himself that helped to establish the myth that while completing the Phenomenology of Spirit, Hegel could hear the thunder of cannons while Napoleon advanced on Jena. In fact, the book had been substantially completed two weeks earlier (see 228-229). Hegel did in fact father a son out of wedlock, but later formally adopted the boy, who unfortunately never felt fully integrated into the family. Moreover, Hegel's own deeds, not merely his philosophical position in The Philosophy of Right, helped to earn for him the reputation of supporting the conservative views of the Prussian state. For instance, going...

MacIntyre, Clark, and Heidegger would all agree that the current problem with moral theory is its lack of a satisfactory conception of human telos. This lack leads us to resort to such fictions as rights, interests, and utility, which are “disguises for the will to power.” Ibid., p. 240. These thinkers would also agree that modern nation-states are cut off from the roots of the Western tradition. Modern political economy, with “its individualism, its acquisitiveness and its elevation of the values of the market to a central social place”Ibid., p. 237. is leading us into “the coming age of barbarism and darkness.”Ibid., p. 244. MacIntyre's grim depiction of the future, which Heidegger calls “the time of the darkening of the earth” and “the flight of the gods”,Heidegger, “What Are Poets For?” in Poetry, Language, Thought. can only be met by re-appropriating our own tradition. Although Aristotle has much to tell us, I believe Heidegger is right to turn to Heraclitus for a non-anthropocentric conception of humanity's place in Nature. Other writers, however, such as Arne Naess, George Sessions, and Stuart Hampshire, argue that the writings of Spinoza may offer the most helpful vision of humanity needed to guide our efforts to find a more appropriate basis for our behavior toward each other and toward the non-human world as well.George Sessions, “Spinoza and Jeffets on Man in Nature,” Inquiry 20 (1977):481–528. Sessions' essay was criticized by Genevieve Lloyd in “Spinoza's Environmental Ethics,” Inquiry 23 (1980):293–311. In reply, Arne Naess wrote “Environmental Ethics and Spinoza's Ethics: Comments on Genevieve Lloyd's Article,” Inquiry 23 (1980):313~ 325. Cf. also Stuart Hampshire, Two Theories of Morality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977). Yet Aristotle, Qark, Heidegger, Heraclitus, Maclntyre, and Spinoza all agree that in order to behave fittingly, we must understand what it means to be human. At this time, I would like to acknowledge the importance of the following objection to what I have been arguing here: While it may be true that the concept of human rights is a fiction, it is nevertheless a very useful fiction for changing how human beings relate to each other. Tom Regan has frequently pointed out that even if the concept of rights proves to be ficticious, it can be helpful in protecting non-human beings from abuse by humans. Cf. his essay “Exploring the Idea of Animal Rights,” Animals' Rights - A Symposium (Sussex and London: Centaur Press Ltd., 1979); Regan, “Animal Rights, Human Wrongs,” Environmental Ethics 2 (1980):99–120. The doctrine of the rights of man justified the American and French revolutions, which brought forth new and important human freedoms. Today, most of humanity still lacks the protection afforded by constitutionally guaranteed human rights. Moreover, even in constitutional democracies there are frequent abuses of and attempts to curtail human rights. Until far more people become committed to protecting human rights, it is unlikely that there will be a big movement to extend rights to non-human beings, much less to overcome the anthropocentrism inherent in the concept of rights. What the Buddhist tradition calls “skillful means” is appropriate in our current situation.My thanks to Professor David Levin of Northwestern University for having reminded me of the importance of approaching the question of human rights in a “skillful” way. We must approach people in a way sensitive to their current self-understanding. Before we can pass on to the stage of planetary unity made possible by non-anthropocentric thinking, we need to find ways that promote mutual respect among human beings.On the topic of the relation between spiritual-psychological growth and the shift in human morality, cf. M.W. Fox, “Animal Rights and Nature Liberation,” in Animals' Rights - A Symposium. Out of such respect there can also arise respect for the non-human as well. While largely in agreement with this point of view, I would like to note that our means must be very skillful, indeed, if we are to transform our relationships to each other and to the natural world before irreparable damage is done to the earth, through nuclear war or environmental destruction. The time grows short for the transformation needed to bring us from the stage of anthropocentrism to a deeper awareness of our internal relationship to the whole world. Some people, such as Peter Russell, argue that we are witnessing the evolution of a non-anthropocentric mode of planetary consciousness that will be supported by the revolution in communications and computers. Peter Russel, The Global Brain: Speculations on the Evolutionary Leap tp Planetary Consciousness (New York: J.P. Tarcher, 1983). Other people, such as Jeremy Rifkin, maintain that the coming computer age promises ever greater intrusions into natural processes, such as the drive for control of genetic structures.Jeremy Rifkin, Algeny (New York: Viking, 1983). In my view, while it is important to extend the idea of human rights wherever possible, it is also crucial that we consider seriously the possibility that the idea of human rights is merely a transitional way of conceiving of morality. As we learn more about the interrelationship of human life with all other aspects of the earth's life, our self-understanding will no longer be in harmony with the human-centered morality we know today. We will either learn to respect all beings and act toward them in appropriate ways, or else we will continue down the road we are now headed - a road which seems to have a very disturbing destination. Learning to dwell appropriately on earth is the most pressing moral issue of the day

Michel Haar's book strikes an admirable balance between a sympathetic analysis of, and a critical dialogue with Heidegger's work. In clear and elegant prose, Haar elucidates obscure passages and raises critical questions about issues that are usually ignored. He argues that despite Heidegger's preoccupation with the "history of being," he was also concerned with the "nonhistorical," that is, with what cannot be included within history. Heidegger maintained that the history of being began with the Greeks and culminates in modern technology, defined as the disclosure of all entities as a completely available "standing reserve" that is useful for enhancing the endless drive for more power. Haar asks: Did Heidegger reduce being to its history? and as a result, did he develop his own version of Hegel's system of world history? Haar answers in the negative: "In effect the development of the history of Being from the Greek logos to modern technology does not exclude, but implies a reserve, an opacity, a reverse side [envers] that it is never possible to disclose. It is this withdrawn and non-manifest dimension that makes history a destiny, and not the logical unfolding that is in Hegel answerable to an eternal necessity". According to Haar, the earth constitutes the basis for the nonhistorical domain that cannot be encompassed within the history of being.