Val Plumwood, "Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason" (Book Note)

 

Plumwood's book, "Environmental Culture," presents a challenge to traditional ethics and environmentalism by advocating for the development of an environmental culture. Rather than proposing a theory solely focused on nature's moral standing or a manifesto for environmental values, Plumwood calls for an ongoing culture where ethical relationships with the biosphere are integral to human flourishing. The urgency of this call arises from the potential entrenchment of human recklessness towards the environment within various aspects of Western and globalized forms of life. Plumwood suggests that our views on humanity, rationality, science, politics, economics, self-health, relationships, spirituality, and religion may all contribute to unsustainable environmental practices.

 

Plumwood's book makes a valuable contribution by addressing the need for cultural change and offering suggestions for transforming aspects of our globalized culture. However, the delivery is hindered by unclear arguments, jargon, and the tendency to make sweeping empirical claims without sufficient evidence. Despite these shortcomings, the book remains useful for its insights and challenges, even if it lacks a robust argument.

 

The core of Plumwood's argument revolves around the claim that what is considered rational within global capitalism and Western culture is, in reality, irrational. Plumwood contends that the prevailing form of rationality leads to self-destruction on the planet, unethical treatment of the biosphere, and a failure to promote human flourishing. The central idea is that rationality should promote ecological relationships, and any form of reason that neglects or harms these relationships should be deemed irrational. Plumwood emphasizes the need for a shift in our form of life to embody an ecologically sound understanding of human flourishing.

 

Plumwood critiques the current understanding of rationality, drawing attention to its focus on maximizing self-interest, human-centric ends, an ontological split between humanity and the biosphere, objectification in scientific practice, and a lack of awareness regarding place-based and interspecies relationships. However, her arguments face challenges. Firstly, her characterization of rationality focuses on ends and ontologies, deviating from the conventional understanding of rationality as primarily concerned with means to ends. Secondly, the sources of this unified notion of rationality remain obscure, with references to Cartesianism, eighteenth-century political economy, capitalism, Christianity, and sexism lacking systematic articulation and evidence.

 

Plumwood's empirical claims about the destructive consequences of capitalism's rationality and the unethical treatment of the biosphere are contentious and lack comprehensive evidence. The distinction between unethical behavior due to human wantonness and disrespect towards the biosphere could be clearer, as these aspects are not adequately distinguished or interrelated in her argument.

In the introductory chapter, Plumwood outlines two pivotal challenges crucial for the success of a transition to an environmental culture. The first challenge is the "re-situating of the human in ecological terms," while the second challenge involves the "re-situating of the non-human in ethical terms." Essentially, Plumwood advocates for the development of a human ecology coupled with a non-anthropocentric ecological ethics.

 

As the book primarily addresses the ecological crisis in contemporary Western society, one of its main targets for critique is science. Plumwood contends that much of contemporary science reflects a "form of monological and dualistic thinking," where scientists distance themselves radically from the objects of knowledge, denying these objects elements of commonality, mind, or intentionality. This rationalist perspective leads to the objectification, complete knowability, and technological manageability of nature, reducing it to something replicable and replaceable. Plumwood argues that such thinking is inherently anti-ecological, neglecting or ignoring humanity's interconnectedness and embeddedness in non-human nature. She suggests that this dualistic model of science is expanding, particularly with a significant portion of scientists employed by corporations, turning science more towards manipulation and less towards understanding, with knowledge acquisition justified primarily by instrumental concerns.

 

Plumwood's critique extends beyond social justice advocacy, encompassing a deep concern for non-human nature. She presents an elaborate critique of anthropocentrism, arguing that a radically rationalistic worldview bifurcates the world into separate realms of active, knowing 'subjects' (humans) and passive, knowable 'objects' (nature), resulting in a "radical discontinuity" between humans and non-human nature.

 

She identifies four ways in which this dualistic human-centeredness is fundamentally anti-ecological and hubristic. Firstly, it justifies an ethics that does not extend beyond the "human-species boundary," neglecting ethical considerations for non-human nature. Secondly, human dependency on nature is downplayed or denied, reducing ecology to a mere "technological problem to be overcome" and fostering a false sense of human autonomy. Thirdly, nature is defined by what it lacks in its non-humanness, becoming a purely negative space devoid of culture, cultivation, and improvements. Finally, nature's independent agency is erased, and its value is only assessed concerning human interests. Plumwood argues that overcoming these "blindspots of centrism and human self-enclosure" is essential for the survival of both humans and nature in an age of ecological limits.

 

Plumwood goes beyond the general feminist critique of dualistic conceptions of rationality, which often focuses on the creation of hierarchies between opposed categories such as masculine knowing subjects and feminine objects. Instead of merely discussing dualisms as a failure to assign appropriate value to the denigrated, she argues that ethical emphasis on value and rights perpetuates rankings, replicating hierarchical structures and measuring all other life in comparison to humans. Plumwood proposes a shift from the project of extending human-centered thought to recognizing the value of others in relation to human worth. Instead, she advocates for starting with basic respect for all life and approaching others with an ethos of intentional recognition and openness.

 

Plumwood acknowledges that the alternatives she suggests challenge the existing order deeply at various levels. Her critical argument centers on the observation that prevalent conceptions of rationality hinder the recognition of nonhumans as agents with their own communication systems and ways of being mindful, different from humans. Beginning with the belief that the other is potentially communicative, Plumwood argues for an ethos of intentional recognition, emphasizing the richness of communicative possibilities in the world. She encourages viewing relationships with the world as dialogues rather than monologues, where meaningful communication is not limited to humans or elite humans.

 

Throughout the book, Plumwood emphasizes the irrationality inherent in what is often considered rationality. She critiques the failure to appreciate the interconnectedness between humans and the natural world, labeling it as a highly irrational response. While she critiques specific modes of rationality, she relies on another understanding of rationality to develop her critique. Plumwood presents a positive conception of rationality as a form of life, emphasizing balance, harmony, and reconcilability among an organism's identities, faculties, and ends. True rationality, according to Plumwood, involves socially and ecologically healthy decisions, acknowledging the embodiment of knowers, the contextuality of knowledge, and the necessity of caring for flourishing.

 

Plumwood's work illuminates how distortions in reason and culture contribute to life-threatening ecological denial. In her multi-dimensional account of the crisis of reason, she reveals the connections between culture's destructive practices, ethical and spiritual shortcomings, and the failure to recognize ourselves as ecological beings. Drawing from feminist thought, post-colonial theory, indigenous philosophy, and extensive research, Plumwood provides a thought-provoking diagnosis of cultural illusions contributing to the contemporary environmental crisis.

Environmental culture exposes the anthropocentric logic of human self-enclosure, which masquerades as rationality and infiltrates various cultural spheres. Plumwood argues that a disembedded economic system collaborates with an instrumentalist, profit-driven science, creating a reductionist form of science that deadens the natural world. This reductionist science fosters illusions of power over nature, contributing to conceptual blindspots and dislocation between production and consumption. Political and economic systems normalize biospheric degradation, suppressing critical reflexive feedback.

 

Plumwood challenges divisive dualisms, revealing humans as ecologically embedded and nonhumans as ethical subjects. She advocates for caring and life-affirming forms of rationality, fostering inter-species dialogue and mutual flourishing. Her materialist and place-based spirituality contributes to a critical political ecology. She proposes an integrated, democratic, ethically responsive vision of science that respects the agency of the more-than-human world. Plumwood advocates for reducing remoteness as a political goal for ecological rationality, rejecting eco-authoritarian solutions and promoting procedural and participatory democracy.

 

She rejects the separation and privileging of reason over nature, critiquing the delusion that human rationality elevates us above the natural world. Plumwood emphasizes ecosystems' interdependence and agency, advocating for an environmental ethics of care. This moral framework aligns prudential and ethical treatment of non-humans, emphasizing respectful and supportive relationships with the natural world.