Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T20:06:24.903Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FREEDOM AND DEPENDENCY IN AN ENVIRONMENTAL AGE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2009

Andrew Dobson
Andrew Dobson
Affiliation:
Politics, Keele University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article the implications of our nature as both autonomous and heteronomous beings is discussed. It is suggested that our condition as part-dependent creatures calls for a reconsideration of the nature of both freedom and liberalism, and the work of Alasdair MacIntyre and Jean-Paul Sartre is used to illustrate the natural and historical dimensions of our dependency. The conclusion reached is that neither deep ecological re-enchantment nor full-blooded cornucopianism are possible, and that we need to take our nature as semi-dependent creatures seriously as we seek ways of negotiating our way through our environmental problems.

Keywords

freedomdependencyautonomyheteronomyKantMacIntyreSartredialecticliberalism
Type
Research Article
Information
Social Philosophy and Policy , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , July 2009 , pp. 151 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © Social Philosophy and Policy Foundation 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kant, Immanuel, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), ed. Wolff, Robert Paul (Indianapolis, IN, and New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1969), 32–33Google Scholar.

2 Ibid., 50.

3 Ibid., 67.

4 Ibid.

5 Ibid., 61.

6 Ibid., 63.

7 Ibid., 53.

8 Ibid., 64–65.

9 Ibid., 71; the bracketed insertion is mine.

10 Schneewind, Jerome, “The Use of Autonomy in Ethical Theory,” in Heller, Agnes et al. , eds., Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality, and the Self in Western Thought (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986), 69Google Scholar.

11 Mulhall, Stephen, and Swift, Adam, Liberals and Communitarians (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), 117Google Scholar.

12 Thomas, Julia A., “The Cage of Nature: Modernity's History in Japan,” History and Theory 40, no. 1 (2001): 16–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Ibid., 17.

14 Ibid., 16.

15 Ibid., 18.

16 Horkheimer, Max and Adorno, Theodor, Dialectic of Enlightenment (New York: Continuum, 2000), 54Google Scholar.

17 Ibid.

18 Harding, Sandra, The Science Question in Feminism (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1986), 171Google Scholar.

19 Phelan, Shane, “Intimate Distance: The Dislocation of Nature in Modernity,” The Western Political Quarterly 45 (June 1992): 385CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Hegel, Georg, Hegel's Philosophy of Right (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 1967) 90Google Scholar.

21 Ibid.

22 Plant, Raymond, Modern Political Thought (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 347Google Scholar.

23 Nancy Chodorow, “Toward a Relational Individualism: The Mediation of Self Through Psychoanalysis,” in Heller et al., eds., Reconstructing Individualism, 197.

24 Ibid., 199 (my emphasis).

25 Zvesper, John, Nature and Liberty (London and New York: Routledge, 1993), 116CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Benhabib, Seyla, “The Generalized and the Concrete Other,” in Kittay, Eva Feder and Meyers, Diana T., Women and Moral Theory (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield, 1987), 166–67Google Scholar.

27 Bhaskar, Roy, Philosophy and the Idea of Freedom (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 53Google Scholar.

28 MacIntyre, Alasdair, Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues (Chicago: Open Court, 1999), ixGoogle Scholar.

29 Ibid., 10.

30 Ibid., 4.

31 Ibid., 5.

32 Ibid.

33 Ibid., 8.

34 Ibid.

35 Ibid.

36 Ibid., 81.

37 Ibid., 11 (emphasis in the original).

38 Ibid., 12.

39 Wolcher, Louis E., “Nature and Freedom,” The Independent Review 9, no. 2 (2004): 263Google Scholar.

40 Ibid., 264.

41 Ibid.

42 Ibid., 266.

43 Wolcher is not so naïve as to think that we should never think of nature as resource: “No reasonable person doubts that human beings need natural resources in order to live and prosper.” Ibid., 266.

44 Bhaskar, Philosophy and the Idea of Freedom, 73.

45 Kant, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, 61.

46 Wissenburg, Marcel, Green Liberalism: The Free and the Green Society (London: UCL Press, 1998), 33Google Scholar.

47 Ibid.

48 Zvesper, Nature and Liberty, 4.

49 John Locke, Two Treatises of Government, ed. Laslett, Peter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), Second Treatise, section 27Google Scholar.

50 Ibid., section 42.

51 McKibben, Bill, The End of Nature (New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland: Anchor Books, 1999), 54–55Google Scholar.

52 Ibid., 46.

53 Locke, Second Treatise, section 33.

54 Ibid., section 49.

55 Ibid., section 31.

56 Ibid., section 46.

57 Ibid., section 47.

58 Ortega y Gasset, José, Obras Completas (Madrid: Revista de Occidente, 1957), vol. 4, pp. 321–22Google Scholar.

59 Avineri, Shlomo, The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), 70CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Ibid., 71.

61 Sartre, Jean-Paul, Critique of Dialectical Reason (London: New Left Books, 1976), 90Google Scholar.

62 Ibid., 122.

63 Ibid., 125.

64 Ibid.

65 Ibid., 180.

66 Ibid., 181.

67 Ibid., 122.

68 Ibid., 137.

69 Ibid., 829.

70 Ibid., 166.

71 Ibid., 184.

72 Ibid., 162.

73 Ibid., 223.

74 Ibid., 226–27.

75 Ibid., 222.