CHAPTER 2
Philosophy and Man's Responsibility for Nature
Andreas Brenner
2.1
Introduction
1997 has been a year of important anniversaries for environmental politics: 5 years for
the Conference of Rio, 10 years for the Conference of Montreal and 10 years for the
Brundtland Report Our Common Future. For politics these anniversaries should be a
cause not only to declare new political intention but also to critically reconsider what
has been achieved so far. Politics has to answer the question of why it was not more
committed to saving nature. Why did the ozone layer have to be destroyed and the risk
of climate change to be taken before politicians realized there was a big problem to
solve? Why does it take such a long time for a paradigm shift? It is my thesis that this
paradigm shift in politics cannot emerge before philosphy by itself develops a new
paradigm. The responsibility of philosophy, however, is greater and extended to the
structure of thinking and acting which causes the destruction of nature.
In order to examine the relation between philosophy and man's responsibility for
nature the first thing that has to be discussed is the role of traditional philosophy, both
in general and in the development of modern natural sciences. The precondition for
the rapid development of natural sciences was a change in the way man perceived the
physical world. This resulted in a change of conception of the world and of the human
being as such. The beginning of this process can be observed in the transition from the
Renaissance world to modern times. Two individuals were of particular importance in
this dramatic period: Leonardo da Vinci and Francis Bacon.
Leonardo's (1452-1519) profession as a painter led him to explore the human body.
He had already painted his most famous pictures, The Last Supper and the Mona Lisa,
when he began to investigate the human body. However, with simple observation he
could not satisfy his curiosity. Leonardo felt that he had to search deeper and started to
dissect human bodies, in total more than 30 human corpses. The results of these investigations have been preserved in his drawings. The goal of Leonardo's dissections was
to learn how nature worked. Through his new knowledge he hoped he would be able to
paint better pictures. However, Leonardo was not only a painter but also a great engineer
(Maschat 1989). He based the constructions of machines on his study of biological mechanisms. When, for example, designing an aeroplane he tried to copy a bird. In this way Leonardo stands for the interest and respect with which Renaissance man regarded nature.
Francis Bacon's (1561-1626) principles of investigation were completely different from
Leonardo's. Whereas Leonardo's studies were the result of pure curiosity aiming at knowledge for its own sake, Francis Bacon did not consider knowledge as a goal in itself but
as a stepping-stone in a process of application. In order to ensure this outcome Bacon
needed a method which would make such investigations uniform and therefore repro-
Philosophy and Man's Responsibility for Nature
Andreas Brenner
2.1
Introduction
1997 has been a year of important anniversaries for environmental politics: 5 years for
the Conference of Rio, 10 years for the Conference of Montreal and 10 years for the
Brundtland Report Our Common Future. For politics these anniversaries should be a
cause not only to declare new political intention but also to critically reconsider what
has been achieved so far. Politics has to answer the question of why it was not more
committed to saving nature. Why did the ozone layer have to be destroyed and the risk
of climate change to be taken before politicians realized there was a big problem to
solve? Why does it take such a long time for a paradigm shift? It is my thesis that this
paradigm shift in politics cannot emerge before philosphy by itself develops a new
paradigm. The responsibility of philosophy, however, is greater and extended to the
structure of thinking and acting which causes the destruction of nature.
In order to examine the relation between philosophy and man's responsibility for
nature the first thing that has to be discussed is the role of traditional philosophy, both
in general and in the development of modern natural sciences. The precondition for
the rapid development of natural sciences was a change in the way man perceived the
physical world. This resulted in a change of conception of the world and of the human
being as such. The beginning of this process can be observed in the transition from the
Renaissance world to modern times. Two individuals were of particular importance in
this dramatic period: Leonardo da Vinci and Francis Bacon.
Leonardo's (1452-1519) profession as a painter led him to explore the human body.
He had already painted his most famous pictures, The Last Supper and the Mona Lisa,
when he began to investigate the human body. However, with simple observation he
could not satisfy his curiosity. Leonardo felt that he had to search deeper and started to
dissect human bodies, in total more than 30 human corpses. The results of these investigations have been preserved in his drawings. The goal of Leonardo's dissections was
to learn how nature worked. Through his new knowledge he hoped he would be able to
paint better pictures. However, Leonardo was not only a painter but also a great engineer
(Maschat 1989). He based the constructions of machines on his study of biological mechanisms. When, for example, designing an aeroplane he tried to copy a bird. In this way Leonardo stands for the interest and respect with which Renaissance man regarded nature.
Francis Bacon's (1561-1626) principles of investigation were completely different from
Leonardo's. Whereas Leonardo's studies were the result of pure curiosity aiming at knowledge for its own sake, Francis Bacon did not consider knowledge as a goal in itself but
as a stepping-stone in a process of application. In order to ensure this outcome Bacon
needed a method which would make such investigations uniform and therefore repro-