Quote:
Templarski red kaže:
@Dragane
Sustavni uvid u novi svjetonazor by Fritjof Capra
Tu su neka njegova promišljanja o stvarima za koje si se zanimao u temi. Ostavio sam link na stranici 3 ali pročitaj sve.
A zanima me i @cestarov komentar |
Izvanredno, poticajno... nisam čitao Capru, ali slični pogledi su već 'mainstream'... a toliko su već utjecali na mnogobrojne znanstvene teorije koje rade sa sustavima... biologija, sociologija, ekonomija.
Zbog toga mi nema smisla direktna usporedba Caprine "The Tao of Physics" i Standardnog modela kao znanstvene teorije... različita je njihova uloga.
Caprine ideje spadaju među one koje, kad su i pogrešne, otvaraju nove staze spoznaje.
U članku koji si poslao naglašava se razlika "plitke" i "duboke" ekologije.
U "plitkoj" ekologiji naglasak je, kako se tumači, na direktnoj koristi za čovjeka od očuvanja ekosustava... recikliranje, npr., i kao takva je "antropocentrična".
"Duboka" podrazumijeva odmak prema biocentrizmu... dobro, ali, kako je pisac William D. Grey dobro primijetio, problem "plitke" ekologije nije u njezinoj koncentriranosti na dobrobit ljudi,
već u vrlo uskom shvaćanju te dobrobiti.
Murray Bookchin, socijalni ekolog, interpretirao je čak "duboku" ekologiju kao mizantropsku... a neki ekstremni pokreti i opravdavaju to mišljenje, ruku na srce.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_ecology
Quote:
|
Bookchin's second major criticism is that deep ecology fails to link environmental crises with authoritarianism and hierarchy. Social ecologists like him believe that environmental problems are firmly rooted in the manner of human social interaction, and suggest that deep ecologists fail to recognise the potential for human beings to solve environmental issues through a change of cultural attitudes. According to Bookchin, it is a social reconstruction alone that "can spare the biosphere from virtual destruction."[32] Though some deep ecologists may reject the argument that ecological behavior is rooted in the social paradigm (which, according to their view, would be an anthropocentric fallacy), others in fact embrace this argument, such as the adherents to the deep ecologist movement Deep Green Resistance.
|
Što se perenijalne filozofije tiče, na Filozofiji sam ti poslao link na temi o društvenim podjelama...
What’s wrong with the Perennial Philosophy?
Ukratko, možda se ne penjemo na isti vrh... ali bi morali priznati ljepotu cijelog planinskog lanca... jednom, kada budemo gore.
Quote:
|
While Ferrer hopes spiritual pluralism will allow a more fruitful and respectful dialogue between faiths (and he may well be right), I wonder if Tanya Luhrmann has a point, when she suggests the real conclusion of this view is rather melancholy – we’re not just living in different belief-systems, we’re actually living in different universes. But – more optimistically – these realities, these universes, aren’t discrete. They’re not hermetically sealed off from each other. They interconnect. They overlap. Perhaps in some way they connect together into a grand symphony. This is one reason not everyone in the west should become a Buddhist – it would be like everyone singing the same part in the symphony. We need some singing bass, some singing alto, and Richard Dawkins on kazoo.
|
Moram spomenuti još jednu knjigu, možda povezanu sa Caprinim konceptom... iako je ekonomija u pitanju.
Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered, by E. F. Schumacher
Toliko za sada, nekoliko dana se neću moći javljati...
