The  Limits and Possibilities of Philosophy:  Who is the Subject of Rights in the Context of Environmental Issues?

Tatiana Sedová; Zlatica Plašienková

doi:10.21697/seb.5872

Published: 2025-11-15

The Limits and Possibilities of Philosophy: Who is the Subject of Rights in the Context of Environmental Issues?

Tatiana Sedová

, Zlatica Plašienková

Studia Ecologiae et Bioethicae

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.21697/seb.5872

Abstract

The authors of the paper examine the limits and possibilities of philosophy in the context of environmental issues. Philosophy cannot act as the arbiter of factual empirical problems. It cannot be the purveyor of catastrophic scenarios and romanticize the ideas of the pre-industrial age on the one hand, while acting as the prophet of technocratic optimism on the other. Doing philosophy means analysing concepts, especially ones that are essentially contested, in addition to assessing the validity of the evidence and argumentation procedures and practices relating to the contemporary ecological crisis, which is both civilizational and related to the concept of the Anthropocene. In general, philosophy should and could discuss the destructive values of consumer civilization. However, this does not mean creating a new form of mythology in which the planet acquires subjectivity. The authors critically discuss some aspects of the philosophical theory of the Czech philosopher Josef Šmajs (1938-), which attributes the cause of the contemporary ecological crisis to the flawed predatory culture and argues in favour of recognizing the subjectivity of the planet Earth and the Constitution for the Earth.

Keywords:

philosophy, environmental issues, naturalism, anthropocene, subject of rights, environmental philosophy, Constitution for the Earth

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

Sedová, T., & Plašienková, Z. (2025). The Limits and Possibilities of Philosophy: Who is the Subject of Rights in the Context of Environmental Issues?. Studia Ecologiae Et Bioethicae. https://doi.org/10.21697/seb.5872

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

Bauer, Andrew M., Matt Edgeworth. and Lucy E. Edwards, et al. 2021. “Anthropocene: Event or Epoch?” Nature 597 (Sept.): 332. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02448-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02448-z
Google Scholar

Berry, Thomas. 1999. The Great Work: Our Way into the Future. New York: Bell Tower.
Google Scholar

Carson, Rachel. 1962. Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Google Scholar

Crutzen, Paul J. 2002. “Geology of Mankind.” Nature 415 (6867): 23. https://doi.org/10.1038/415023a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/415023a
Google Scholar

Crutzen, Paul J., and Eugene F. Stoermer. 2000. “The Anthropocene.” IGBP Newsletter 41 (May): 17–18.
Google Scholar

Cullinan, Cormac. 2003. Wild Law: A Manifesto for Earth Justice. Totnes: Green Books in association with The Gaia Foundation.
Google Scholar

Diamond, Jared. 2005. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. New York: Viking Press.
Google Scholar

Gallie, Walter Bryce. 1956. “Essentially Contested Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56 (1): 167–198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/56.1.167
Google Scholar

Gallie, Walter Bryce. 1964. Philosophy and the Historical Understanding. London: Chatto & Windus.
Google Scholar

Gardiner, Stephen. 2011. A Perfect Moral Storm: The Ethical Tragedy of Climate Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195379440.003.0002
Google Scholar

Gibbard, Philip, Michael J.C. Walker, and Andrew M. Bauer, et al. 2022. “The Anthropocene as an Event, Not an Epoch.” Journal of Quaternary Science 37 (3): 395–399. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3416. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3416
Google Scholar

Gorz, André. 1991. Capitalisme, socialisme, écologie. Paris: Galilée.
Google Scholar

Gorz, André. 2008. Écologica. Paris: Galilée.
Google Scholar

Hamilton, Clive, Christophe Bonneuil, and François Gemenne, eds. 2015. The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental Crisis: Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315743424
Google Scholar

Haraway, Donna. 2015. “Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Plantationocene, Chthulucene: Making Kin.” Environmental Humanities 6 (1): 159–165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/22011919-3615934
Google Scholar

Jackson, Frank. 1998. From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defense of Conceptual Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Kennedy, Paul. 1993. Preparing for the twenty-first century. New York: Random House.
Google Scholar

Kolbert, Elizabeth. 2014. The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Google Scholar

Leopold, Aldo. 1949. A Sand County Almanac. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Ladyman, James, and Don Ross. 2007. Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199276196.001.0001
Google Scholar

Marko, Vladimír. 2022. Argumenty a klimatické zmeny [Arguments and climate change.] Bratislava: Univerzita Komenského.
Google Scholar

Moore, Jason W. 2016. Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism. Oakland, CA: PM Press.
Google Scholar

Naess, Arne. 1973. “The Shallow and the Deep. Long-Range Ecology Movement.” Inquiry, 16 (1-4): 95-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00201747308601682
Google Scholar

Quine, Willard V. O. 1969. “Epistemology Naturalized.” In Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, edited by Willard V. Quine, 69–90. New York: Columbia University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7312/quin92204-004
Google Scholar

Quinn, Daniel. 2009. Ishmael: A Novel. New York: Random House Publishing Group.
Google Scholar

Rockström, Johan, Will Steffen, and Kevin Noone, et al. 2009. “Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity.” Ecology and Society 14 (2): 32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03180-140232
Google Scholar

Schütz, Alfred. 1954. “Concept and Theory Formation in the Social Science.” Journal of Philosophy 52 (9): 257–273. https://doi:10.2307/2021812. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2021812
Google Scholar

Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy. 2024. “Outcome of the Anthropocene Working Group Proposal.” International Commission on Stratigraphy. March 19, 2024. https://quaternary.stratigraphy.org/news/152.
Google Scholar

Steffen, Will, Paul J. Crutzen, and John R. McNeill. 2007. “The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature?” AMBIO 36 (8): 614–621. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[614:TAAHNO]2.0.CO;2
Google Scholar

Steffen, Will, Wendy Broadgate, and Lisa Deutsch, at al. 2015. “The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration.” The Anthropocene Review 2 (1): 81–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019614564785
Google Scholar

Steffen, Will, Reinhold Leinfelder, Jan Zalasiewicz, at al. 2016. “Stratigraphic and Earth System approaches to defining the Anthropocene.” Earth's Future, 4: 324–345. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000379. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000379
Google Scholar

Stone, C.D. 1972. “Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects”. Southern California law Review, 45: 450-501.
Google Scholar

Šmajs, Josef. 1995. Ohrožení kultúra. Od evoluční ontologie k ekologické politice [Culture under threat. From evolutionary ontology to ecological politics]. Brno: “Zvláštní vydání“.
Google Scholar

Šmajs, Josef. 2000. Drama evoluce. Fragment evoluční ontologie [The Drama of Evolution. A Fragment of an Evolutionary Ontology]. Praha: Hynek.
Google Scholar

Šmajs, Josef. 2008. Filozofie – obrat k Zemi, evoločne ontologická reflexe přírody, kultury, techniky a lidského poznaní [Philosophy – a turn to the Earth, an evolutionary ontological reflection of nature, culture, technology and human knowledge]. Praha: Academia.
Google Scholar

Šmajs, Josef. 2015. “The Philosophical Conception of a Constitution for the Earth”. Human Affairs, 25: 342–361. https://doi:10.1515/humaff-2015-0028. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2015-0028
Google Scholar

Waismann, Friedrich. 1945. “Verifiability.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 19: 120–150.
Google Scholar

Zalasiewicz, Jan, Colin N. Waters, Mark Williams, and Anthony Summerhayes, eds. 2019. The Anthropocene as a Geological Time Unit: A Guide to the Scientific Evidence and Current Debate. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108621359
Google Scholar