Scholarlink

<p>What, if anything, is new about the ethical demands that the Anthropocene places on human action? We refer to this question as <i>the</i> Anthropocene question, since only an ethics that provides a precise answer to that question is properly an ethics of the Anthropocene. While scholars in the environmental humanities have addressed the Anthropocene question, we bring this question to normative theory. To this end, we put forward a critical reading of Hans Jonas’s 1979 <i>The Imperative of Responsibility</i>, in which he develops normative principles on the basis of a historical diagnosis of novelty. Recent developments in scholarship on 5th-century B.C.E. Athenian tragedy allows us to challenge Jonas, who at crucial points misdiagnoses and overstates this novelty. Using Jonas’s work as an exemplar of a complete ethics of the Anthropocene, we highlight the importance of principles for ethical deliberation: an ethics for the Anthropocene needs not only principles for action, but also principles for how to deliberate on action. Criticizing Jonas’s and more recent views that democracy is unfit for the Anthropocene, we show that 5th-century Athenian tragedy was a sophisticated democratic practice of deliberation of the sort that is required for the Anthropocene.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Hans Jonas and Sophocles on the ethics of the Anthropocene

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月12日

查看全文
  • Benjamin Folit-Weinberg,
  • Jens van ’t Klooster

摘要

What, if anything, is new about the ethical demands that the Anthropocene places on human action? We refer to this question as the Anthropocene question, since only an ethics that provides a precise answer to that question is properly an ethics of the Anthropocene. While scholars in the environmental humanities have addressed the Anthropocene question, we bring this question to normative theory. To this end, we put forward a critical reading of Hans Jonas’s 1979 The Imperative of Responsibility, in which he develops normative principles on the basis of a historical diagnosis of novelty. Recent developments in scholarship on 5th-century B.C.E. Athenian tragedy allows us to challenge Jonas, who at crucial points misdiagnoses and overstates this novelty. Using Jonas’s work as an exemplar of a complete ethics of the Anthropocene, we highlight the importance of principles for ethical deliberation: an ethics for the Anthropocene needs not only principles for action, but also principles for how to deliberate on action. Criticizing Jonas’s and more recent views that democracy is unfit for the Anthropocene, we show that 5th-century Athenian tragedy was a sophisticated democratic practice of deliberation of the sort that is required for the Anthropocene.