Abstract

Intellectual preference and practices of environmental educators, politicians and managers are usually described in terms of anthropocentrism and biocentrism. This distinction is relevant when applied to ontological analysis, related to theoretical grounds, mostly if there is acknowledgement of their many modulations. In the ethical analysis, however, its use run across some difficulties derived from the tensions that take part in the ethical-environmental judgement and practice. Contrary to extreme modulations, moderated stances of biocentrism and anthropocentrism tend to converge and may offer a fertile field for the development of skills for the Education for Sustainable Development.