The Trumpeter - Journal of Ecosophy (Athabasca University)
Not a member yet
1267 research outputs found
Sort by
Review of For Love of Matter: A Contemporary Panpsychism by Freya Mathews, SUNY Press, 2003, 213 pp., reviewed by Glen Cosby
Get PDFAmerican philosopher Jacob Needleman once noted, “we live in a time of metaphysical repression and this repression must be lifted.” Symptomatic of this repression is the reduction of nature from physis to mere 'environment', about which he opines, “one cannot stand in wonder in front of the environment, one can only worry.” Were he seeking an able pair of hands to aid in the lifting of this repression, he might well look to those of Australian ecophilosopher Freya Mathews, whose book, For Love of Matter: A Contemporary Panpsychism (2003, SUNY Press) aims a dart to the heart of this repression. Mathews adds that the environment is not something we can encounter in a fully personal way either, it betokens a world that has been rendered mere backdrop, rather than the lodestar for human meanings and purposes. To breathe life back into the corpse that modern metaphysical repression has made of nature will require nothing less than a “metaphysics of reanimation” of a panpsychist bent that can allow again for enchanted encounter to occur
“Why are those Leaves Red?” Making Sense of the Complex Symbols: Ecosemiotics in Education
Get PDFDeciphering complex signals of constructed educational systems requires symbolic interpretation; deciphering complex signals that are inherently ignorant of their ecological roots requires a modification of a semiotic approach, which we call ecosemiotics. This paper examines one of many average classrooms through this veil of perception. As part of a larger reevaluation of learning in modern culture, we take apart some of the symbols of the classroom and its contained learning. The paper ends with the positing of several more ecosophically inclined teacher responses
Communication Ecology of Arne Naess (1912-2009)
Get PDFWe explore communication ecology and how it shaped Arne Naess’ development from child to mature scholar. As a nature-loving, cross-cultural, comparative philosopher, he explored cultures and nature together. His unified communication ecology reflected the places and cultural elements forming his character and professional approach. Both mirror the evolution of studying communication, cultures and languages with ecological methods used for comprehending the natural world. These methods focus on processes, relationships and whole systems, rather than reductionist analysis. Evolving communication and place-based learning systems are in living communities everywhere. There are cultures, language families, and dialects even in communities of nonhuman species. Naess studied worldviews and life philosophies as naturalists’ study living species and beings in ecosystems. He explored classifying cultures, worldviews and religions with ecologically based methods. He called personal philosophies striving for ecological wisdom and harmony ecosophies. Communication ecology avoids the “one size fits all” study of the world; it facilitates the wisdom of diversity in cultural, linguistic, technological and economic analysis. This approach is pluralistic rather than monolithic
A Critical Appreciation of Ken Wilber’s Critique of Eco-Holism
No full textThe purpose of this essay is to assess Ken Wilber’s critique of eco-holism or radical ecology. It (a) summarizes Wilber’s integral paradigm, then (b) reviews the eco-holistic paradigm (as interpreted by Wilber), (c) summarizes his critique, (d) reviews the rebuttal and counter-rebuttal, (e) assesses briefly the adequacy of Wilber’s critique, (f) reviews his recommended solution to the ecological crisis, then (g) ends with a rejoinder and conclusion. The focus of this essay is on the question of the potential validity of Wilber’s theoretical model upon which his critique of eco-holism is based. The reason for this focus is that Wilber’s specific criticisms of radical ecology are based on his model. If his model can be shown to be implausible or invalid, then Wilber's critique of eco-holism is undermined, if not invalidated. On the contrary, if his model is demonstrated to be plausible or potentially valid, his critique must be taken seriously and then evaluated on other grounds, such as its groundedness in the relevant radical ecological literature. The author concludes that Wilber’s all-quadrant all-level model can be accepted as potentially valid. Therefore, his critique of eco-holism is at least potentially valid, but it suffers from a lack of grounding in the radical ecological literature and unjustifiably broad characterizations of eco-holists
