The concept of the Noosphere is of great importance when looking at the values underpinning the technocratic artifacts and technocracies (human physical technological objects and knowledge processes) by which Humans relate to the Geosphere through other human beings. In this sense, the Noosphere may inform geoethics as an environmental, social, and spiritual praxis and thinking aiming at ecological justice. The concept of the Noosphere represents the coexistence and coevolution of Humans and the Geosphere, overcoming the dichotomy between instrumental materialistic and (...) intrinsic ecocentric values but considering the meaning of a constitutive dimension. Thus, the Noosphere becomes a concept for reconnection with the human community, the natural world, and the Divine, and develops into an ecological mysticism that, in turn, unfolds in resistance in hope as a kind of spiritual activism. The theoretical framework is illustrated with the case study of the Terres de L’Ebre in Catalonia (Spain). (shrink)

Some proponents of the Anthropocene argue that it is time adopt a future-oriented outlook: natural baselines no longer matter, and humans should remake the planet for the better. This raises questions about whose vision should guide such remaking, and whether the past deserves any consideration in adapting for the future. I argue that the past remains relevant, because the natural, cultural, and social worlds people enter into – shaped by those who came before us – matter. On this view, there (...) are reasons to value ‘nature’, even in a human-altered world, and climate adaptation should take that into account. (shrink)

Values have always tended to play a central role in discourse on the environment, a tendency which is currently particularly evident in the biodiversity context. Traditionally, arguments about the environment have invoked instrumental value to highlight the necessity or utility of a healthy environment for people and intrinsic value to emphasize the importance of protecting nature for its own sake. More recently, this value dichotomy has been challenged, and the notion of a third value category – relational value – has (...) been introduced into the political and social conservation discussion. In the field of environmental philosophy, the idea of a third category of environmental value already has a longer tradition. This article describes and compares several philosophical accounts of third-category environmental value to contribute to a better characterization of relational value and thus to a better understanding of the role this type of value can play in environmental discourse and policy. (shrink)