What Does Religion Have to Say About Ecology? A New Appraisal of Naturalism

Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 15 (45):96-119 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Humans as created matter engage with the transcendental. The difference between matter and spirit has been categorised: material and earthly existence is deemed impure and temporary. The spiritual existence is deemed of higher ethical quality. What does religion as an activity focussing on the “higher” spiritual realm have to say about the “wordly” existence of created matter? Worldviews and a religious anthropology determine the outcome. Where human existence is viewed as something other than created matter, a different relationship exists between humans and nature as opposed to where human existence is viewed as being wholly part of created matter. This last stance is based on a “comprehensive anthropology”. Feuerbach referred to this as Naturalism. According to a naturalistic understanding, humankind is intrinsically part of nature. From nature comes all meaningful existence. This positive evaluation of nature provides direction for an ethical and responsible relationship between humankind and nature.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,401

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-11-22

Downloads
30 (#787,710)

6 months
2 (#1,294,541)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

For They Do Not Agree In Nature: Spinoza and Deep Ecology.Gal Kober - 2013 - Ethics and the Environment 18 (1):43-65.

Add more references