I offer myself as a nature guide, exploring for values. Many before us have got lost and we must look the world over. The unexamined life is not worth living; life in an unexamined world is not worth living either. We miss too much of value. Valuable HumansLet us start from well-mapped ground: humans are able to value. Descartes's cogito is as well an indubitable valeo. I cannot doubt that I value. Humans are able to value nature instrumentally, to value (...) their own experiential states both intrinsically and instrumentally. Objective natural things and events may contribute to these subjective interest satisfactions, a tree supplies firewood, a sunny day makes a picnic possible. Taking the first step on our journey into non-human nature, some travellers notice that we must take along this indubitable valuing self; afterwards, along the way, finding these selves always present, they deny any value outside our own minds. Wilhelm Windelband insists: ‘Value … is never found in the object itself as a property. It consists in a relation to an appreciating mind …. Take away will and feeling and there is no such thing as value’ (Windelband, 1921, p. 215). (shrink)

At the end of a thoughtful article on the future of nuclear war, Wiesner and York concluded that: "Both sides in the arms race are... confronted by the dilemma of steadily increasing military power and steadily decreasing national security. It is our considered professional judgment that this dilemma has no technical solution. If the great powers continue to look for solutions in the area of science and technology only, the result will be to worsen the situation.".

William Ophuls has argued that the sources of and solutions for present scarcity conditions are to be found in Western political philosophy. I clarify various theoretical issues raised by Ophuls’ work and offer conceptual alternatives regarding some of the more basic issues. Specifically, I critique the Lockean and Hobbesian elements in Ophuls’ treatment of the role of liberal democracy, with special attention to abundance assumptions and Lockean individualism. I also argue that he fails to deal adequately with resource distribution in (...) his treatment of resource scarcity, that he improperly removes man from nature, that he misunderstands the relationship of technology and politics, and that he encounters other difficulties in terms of the public/private distinction and in integrating micro and macro issues. Ironically, Ophuls’ admirable attempt to shed light on the critical relationship between scarcity conditions and political philosophy may have created a new and disorienting set of shadows. (shrink)

Several prominent analysts, including Heilbroner, Ophuls, and Passmore, have drawn bleak conclusions regarding the implications of contemporary environmental realities for the future of democracy. I establish, however, that the day-to-day practice of environmental politics has often had an opposite effect: democratic processes have been enhanced. I conclude that the resolution of environmental problems may weIl be more promising within a political context which is more rather than less democratic.

Although they were in part otherworldly mystics, the Taoists of ancient China were also keen observers of nature; in fact, they were important early Chinese scientists. I apply Taoist principles to some current ecological questions. The principles surveyed include reversion, the constancy of cyclical change, wu wei (“actionless activity”), and the procurement of power by abandoning the attempt to “take” it. On the basis of these principles, I argue that Taoists would have favored such contemporary options as passive solar energy (...) and organic fanning. (shrink)