Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The influence of science in religion
The influence of science in religion
Religious approaches to environmental issues
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The influence of science in religion
The study of the relationship between religion and ecology introduces multivariate constructs of understanding identity, culture and the basic human life. For most people, religion and ecology relate in terms of various elements of nature. However, the relationship between the two concepts draws across different issues such as the element of originality and ethical relationship with the environment. For instance, religion teaches us about different elements of our origin and identity, as well as the relationship between individuals and their environment. One of the most popular traditional perspectives of the relationship between religion and ecology regards the association between religious practices and the environment. The rationale is that …show more content…
For instance, much of the debate focuses on the role of religion in helping human beings overcome the existent crisis amongst themselves and with the environment. The rationale is that individuals have embraced intolerance, which translates into lack of appreciation of diversity, and observance of religious and societal values. Therefore, the role of religion in enhancing morality has been overthrown by intolerance, as well as lack of appreciation of diversity. The implications is that we have failed to appreciate our roles and responsibility towards the environment, as well as amongst ourselves. Therefore, as highlighted in the book, the study of religion and ecology introduces new perspectives that relate to the understanding of self, identity, as well as contemporary issues. In fact, the book introduces the ethical perspective of highlighting the relationship between religion and ecology, as well as the associated …show more content…
The boiling point is the aspect of identity and our conceptualization of religion in the modern era of scientific advancement. For instance, individuals have valued science over other systems to an extent of discrediting the role of religion and other frameworks that highlight the natural elements of human life and the environment. However, this is despite the fact that the environment is an important element of safeguarding our future, which is under threat and crisis. Understanding the theoretical relationship between religion, identity, ecology and ethics is the only solution to the problems associated with modern concepts such as
The majority of this piece is dedicated to the author stating his opinion in regards to civilization expanding beyond its sustainable limits. The author makes it clear that he believes that humans have failed the natural environment and are in the process of eliminating all traces of wilderness from the planet. Nash points out facts that strengthen his argument, and quotes famous theologians on their similar views on environmental issues and policies. The combination of these facts and quotes validates the author’s opinion.
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.
Identity is defined as the collective aspect of the set of characteristics by which a thing is definitively recognizable or known. There is personal identity and even national identity and, even though everyone in society’s identities can change very quickly, it can convince one of doing almost anything. Without religion as a source of identity, it became fundamentally easy for ideas and ideology such as communism, social norms, and communism to became a person’s identity instead. After all, society’s citizens are always looking to unite through each of their identities.
Ross, H. (1997c). The Shell Game of Evolution and Creation. [Online]. Available: http://www.reasons.org/resources/papers/shellgame.html. [Oct. 1997].
―"Religion in “Brave New World“." Religion in Brave New World. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 May 2014.
Warren, K. J. (1995). The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism. In M. H. MacKinnon & M. McIntyre (Eds.), Readings in Ecology and Feminist Theology (172-195). Kansas City: Sheed and Ward.
Sorrell, Roger D. Saint Francis of Assisi and Nature: Tradition and Innovation in Western Christian Attitudes toward the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Religion is an organized collection of beliefs and cultural systems that entail the worship of a supernatural and metaphysical being. “Religion just like other belief systems, when held onto so much, can stop one from making significant progress in life”. Together with religion come traditions that provide the people with ways to tackle life’s complexities. A subscription to the school of thought of great scholars
And Mr. Crichton theorizes that there are two reasons why we need to go back to environmental science, and leave the religion aspect behind us. First, we need to stick with the cold hard facts of science and we can’t rely on one government political party to solve all of our problems for us, this is an all-for-one type of deal, with no connotations involved. Our second reason he explains is that religions think that they have the answers to everything. But when it comes to environmentalism, we are dealing with discoveries that are still being found to this day, we need to evolve and mesh ourselves in order to accept new ideas and proceed with how to live our lives
At first glance, many facets of science and religion seem to be in direct conflict with each other. Because of this, I have generally kept them confined to separate spheres in my life. I have always thought that science is based on reason and cold, hard facts and is, therefore, objective. New ideas have to be proven many times by different people to be accepted by the wider scientific community, data and observations are taken with extreme precision, and through journal publications and papers, scientists are held accountable for the accuracy and integrity of their work. All of these factors contributed to my view of science as objective and completely truthful. Religion, on the other hand, always seems fairly subjective. Each person has their own personal relationship with God, and even though people often worship as a larger community with common core beliefs, it is fine for one person’s understanding of the Bible and God to be different from another’s. Another reason that Christianity seems so subjective is that it is centered around God, but we cannot rationally prove that He actually exists (nor is obtaining this proof of great interest to most Christians). There are also more concrete clashes, such as Genesis versus the big bang theory, evolution versus creationism, and the finality of death versus the Resurrection that led me to separate science and religion in my life. Upon closer examination, though, many of these apparent differences between science and Christianity disappeared or could at least be reconciled. After studying them more in depth, science and Christianity both seem less rigid and inflexible. It is now clear that intertwined with the data, logic, and laws of scien...
The most obvious reason that the environment has moral significance is that damage to it affects humans. Supporters of a completely human-centered ethic claim that we should be concerned for the environment only as far as our actions would have a negative effect on other people. Nature has no intrinsic value; it is not good and desirable apart from its interaction with human beings. Destruction and pollution of the environment cannot be wrong unless it results in harm to other humans. This view has its roots in Western tradition, which declares that “human beings are the only morally important members of this world” (Singer p.268).
Ecologists formulate their scientific theories influenced by ethical values, and in turn, environmental ethicists value nature based on scientific theories. Darwinian evolutionary theory provides clear examples of these complex links, illustrating how these reciprocal relationships do not constitute a closed system, but are undetermined and open to the influences of two broader worlds: the sociocultural and the natural environment. On the one hand, the Darwinian conception of a common evolutionary origin and ecological connectedness has promoted a respect for all forms of life. On the other hand, the metaphors of struggle for existence and natural selection appear as problematic because they foist onto nature the Hobbesian model of a liberal state, a Malthusian model of the economy, and the productive practice of artificial selection, all of which reaffirm modern individualism and the profit motive that are at the roots of our current environmental crisis. These metaphors were included in the original definitions of ecology and environmental ethics by Haeckel and Leopold respectively, and are still pervasive among both ecologists and ethicists. To suppose that these Darwinian notions, derived from a modern-liberal worldview, are a fact of nature constitutes a misleading interpretation. Such supposition represents a serious impediment to our aim of transforming our relationship with the natural world in order to overcome the environmental crisis. To achieve a radical transformation in environmental ethics, we need a new vision of nature.
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.
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.
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.