The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism

Warren, Karen

doi:10.5840/enviroethics199012221

Cited by 519 publications

(312 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

287

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Warren (1990), la construcción de las fronteras biológicas asume un marco conceptual dualista y dicotómico, basado en una tensión irreconciliable entre ambas partes de todo, en el que uno de los polos se convierte en el término privilegiado (A) frente al defectuoso (no-A), y en el que la subordinación se justifica como moralmente inherente a la relación entre A y no-A.…”

Section: ¿Qué Son Las Fronteras Biológicas?unclassified

Juicios morales y fronteras biológicas: más allá de la frontera razón / emoción

Cabezas¹

2013

Arbor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMEN:Construimos fronteras con supuesta base biológica y derivamos juicios morales de ellas. Asimismo, suponemos que fueron nuestras emociones -el miedo, el asco o la rabia-las que nos llevaron a tal error, especialmente cuando nos damos cuenta de la inconsistencia lógica de derivar juicios morales de dichas fronteras. En consecuencia, solemos identificar emociones con prejuicios, creencias u opciones falaces de las que más nos valdría librarnos. Sin embargo, como se tratará de argumentar a continuación, las emociones no son la causa del problema. Primero, porque el marco conceptual clásico dicotómico en el que razón y emoción son dos polos opuestos regidos por una tensión irreconciliable es a su vez cuestionable. Segundo, porque las emociones, en cuanto alarmas transmisoras de información relevante, pueden ser un elemento tremendamente útil en la identificación y superación de las discriminaciones surgidas de las fronteras dicotómicas. Así, el objetivo de este trabajo es analizar la relación de estos tres elementos, a saber, fronteras biológicas, juicios morales y emociones y, finalmente, argumentar a favor de las conexiones entre razón y emoción, mostrando los posibles beneficios de remplazar el modelo dualista por uno relacional.PALABRAS CLAVE: fronteras biológicas; juicios morales; razón; emoción; dicotomía; moral. ABSTRACT:We build boundaries that are theoretically based on biological grounds and we derive moral judgments from them. Likewise, we take for granted that emotions such as fear, disgust or rage were the element that led us to this mistake, especially when we realise the logical inconsistency of deriving moral judgments in this way. Consequently, we often associate emotions with prejudices, beliefs or fallacies, which we ought to free ourselves from. However, emotions are not the cause of the problem. Firstly, because the classical dichotomical framework that defends the reason/emotion polarity is also questionable. Secondly, because emotions, as alarms which transmit important information, may be a key element in the discovery and overcoming of the discriminations that arise at the boundaries of dichotomies. Thus, the aim here is to analyse the relationship between these three elements: biological boundaries, moral judgments and emotions. And then toargue in favour of the links between reason and emotions as a way of surpassing the old dichotomic model, and, to conclude, I will point out some of the benefits of replacing a dualistic framework by an interactive one.

show abstract

Section: ¿Qué Son Las Fronteras Biológicas?unclassified

Juicios morales y fronteras biológicas: más allá de la frontera razón / emoción

Cabezas¹

2013

Arbor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The problematic conceptual framework-which Karen Warren (1987) defines as "a set of beliefs, values, attitudes, and assumptions which shape, reflect, and explain our view of ourselves and our world" (p. 6)-underlying patriarchal cultures tends to oversimplify the relationship between humans and Nature, such that a relationship based on domination and control is seen as both possible and defensible. Science and technology are socially constructed practices; consequently, they do not merely deliver certain ends, but also impact, transform, and create material, social, and ethical structures.…”

Section: Ecofeminismmentioning

confidence: 99%

An ecofeminist perspective on new food technologies

Lee

2018

CanFoodStudies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New food technologies are touted by some to be an indispensable part of the toolkit when it comes to feeding a growing population, especially when factoring in the growing appetite for animal products. To this end, technologies like genetically engineered (GE) animals and in vitro meat are currently in various stages of research and development, with proponents claiming a myriad of justificatory benefits. However, it is important to consider not only the technical attributes and promissory possibilities of these technologies, but also the worldviews that are being imported in turn, as well as the unanticipated social and environmental consequences that could result. In addition to critiquing dominant paradigms, the inclusive, intersectional ecofeminist perspective presented here offers a different way of thinking about new food technologies, with the aim of exposing inherent biases, rejecting a view of institutions like science and law as being objective, and advancing methods and rationales for a more explicitly ethical form of decision-making. Alternative and marginalized perspectives are especially valuable in this context, because careful reflection on the range of concerns implicated by new food technologies is necessary in order to better evaluate whether or not they can contribute to the building of a more sustainable and just food system for all.

show abstract

“…Violence against girls and women continues to be permissible in many societies and manifests in the form of rape culture and the policing of the female body. The logic of domination (Warren 1990) is crystalized as part of the cultural context worldwide, which may lead to a double victimization of girls. Here, this refers to being female, belonging to a quantitative or qualitative minority, and being aware of this in that such awareness (and the fear) of having a greater chance of becoming a victim just because of one's sex 3 presents this second layer of victimization (Finkelhor 1993;DeGue et al 2012).…”

Section: Girls' Bodily Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Girlhood and Ethics

Cabezas¹,

Schweiger

2016

Girlhood Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our concern is with the ethical issues related to girlhood and bodily integritythe right to be free from physical harm and harassment and to experience freedom and security in relation to the body. We defend agency, positive self-relations, and health as basic elements of bodily integrity and we advocate that this normative concept be used as a conceptual tool for the protection of the rights of girls. We assume the capability approach developed by Martha Nussbaum as an ethical framework that enables us to evaluate girls' well-being and well-becoming in relation to the potential, and often subtle, threats they face. The capability approach can be understood as a theory of justice, and, therefore, as an ethical and political approach. An enriched concept of bodily integrity can help in the design of better policies to address gender biases against girls because it could contribute to seeing them as active agents and valid participants.

show abstract

The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism

Cited by 519 publications

References 0 publications

Juicios morales y fronteras biológicas: más allá de la frontera razón / emoción

Juicios morales y fronteras biológicas: más allá de la frontera razón / emoción

An ecofeminist perspective on new food technologies

Girlhood and Ethics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About