No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2009
This article examines two opposing theoretical paradigms on social, political, economic and ecological questions, namely the neo-Malthusian and the futurological. It argues that these paradigms share an underlying Hobbesian assumption of human nature but differ in their response to this assumption. It argues further that the opposing response to a common assumption holds the key to their respective conceptions of reason. Finally, the article assesses the validity of the paradigms as models for public policy-making and outlines the relative theoretical and practical problems of each.
Ce texte examine deux paradigmes théoriques qui s'opposent sur les plans social, politique, et écologique, à savoir, les paradigmes néo-malthusien et futurologique. Il est ici proposé que ces paradigmes partagent un présupposé anthropologique hobbesien mais q'ils different dans leur réaction respective à ce présupposé. Il est en plus proposé que la réponse opposée à la prémisse commune apporte la clé à leur conception respective de la raison. Finalement, la validité de ces paradigmes en tant que modèles de prise de décision politique est évaluée tout en examinant les problèmes théoriques et pratiques de chacun.
1 See, for example, Leopold, AldoA Sand County Almanac with Essays on Conservation from Round River (Cambridge: Ballantine, 1966);Google ScholarMarx, Leo “American Institutions and Ecological Ideals,” Science 70 (1970), 945–52;Google ScholarCaldwell, Lynton K.Environment: A Challenge to Modern Society (Cambridge: Doubleday, 1971);Google ScholarPassmore, JohnA Man's Responsibility to Nature (2nd ed.; London: Duckworth, 1980);Google Scholar and Bartlett, Robert, “Ecological Rationality: Reason and Environmental Policy,” Environmental Ethics 8 (1986), 221–39.Google Scholar
2 See, for example, Drysek, John S. “Ecological Rationality,” International journal of Environmental Studies 21 (1983), 5–10; and Bartlett, “Ecological Rationality: Reason and Environmental Policy.”Google Scholar
3 Bartlett, , “Ecological Rationality: Reason and Environmental Policy,” 231.Google Scholar
4 Beckerman, Wilfred, In Defence of Economic Growth (London: Jonathan Cape, 1974).Google Scholar
5 Kahn, Herman, World Economic Development: 1979 and Beyond (Boulder: Westview Press, 1976).Google Scholar
6 Maddox, John, The Doomsday Syndrome (London: Macmillan, 1972).Google Scholar
7 Malthus, Thomas, An Essay on the Principle of Population (1801 ed.; Homewood: Richard D. Irving, 1963).Google Scholar
8 Hardin, Garrett, “The Tragedy of the Commons,” Science 161 (1968), 1243–48;Google Scholar and Hardin, Garrett, Population, Evolution and Birth Control: A Collage of Controversial Ideas (2nd ed.; San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1969).Google Scholar
9 Ophuls, William, Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity: Prologue to a Political Theory of the Steady State (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1977).Google Scholar
10 Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity: Prologue to a Political Theory of the Steady State, 156.Google Scholar
11 Boulding, Kenneth, “The Economics of the Coming Space Ship Earth,” in Herman Daly (ed.), Toward a Steady Stale Economy (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1973), 121–32.Google Scholar
12 Daly, Herman, “The Steady State Economy: Toward a Political Economy of Biophysical Equilibrium and Moral Growth,” in Daly (ed.), Toward a Steady State Economy, 149–74.Google Scholar
13 Milisavljevic, Ratko, Environnement, idéologic et science (Paris: Anthropos, 1976).Google Scholar
14 Environnement, idéologic et science, 388–89; my translation.Google Scholar
15 Daly, , “The Steady State Economy: Toward a Political Economy of Biophysical Equilibrium and Moral Growth,” 152.Google Scholar
16 Brown, Lester, World Without Borders (Cambridge: Random House, 1972), 351.Google Scholar
17 Maddox, , The Doomsday Syndrome, 21–22.Google Scholar
18 The Doomsday Syndrome, 65–66.Google Scholar
19 Beckerman, , In Defence of Economic Growth, 227–28.Google Scholar
20 Locke, John, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, collated and annotated by Alexander Campbell Fraser (Cambridge: Dover, 1959).Google Scholar
21 Popper, Karl, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London: Hutchinson, 1959).Google Scholar
22 Feyerabend, Paul, Against Method (London: Verso, 1978).Google Scholar
23 Foucault, Michel, The Archaeology of Knowledge, trans, by Smith, A. M. Sheridan (Cambridge: Pantheon Books, 1972).Google Scholar
24 Macpherson, C. B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962).Google Scholar
25 Lukacs, Georg, History and Class Consciousness, trans, by Livingstone, R. (London:Merlin Press, 1968), 83–222.Google Scholar