Anthropocentrism facts for kids

Anthropocentrism (pronounced an-throw-po-SEN-triz-um) is the idea that humans are the most important beings in the universe. It comes from two Greek words: anthropos, meaning "human being," and kentron, meaning "center." You might also hear it called humanocentrism, human supremacy, or human exceptionalism.

When people have an anthropocentric view, they see humans as separate from and better than nature. This means that other living things like animals and plants, and even non-living things like minerals, are often seen as resources for humans to use.

This way of thinking looks at the world through human eyes, based on human values and experiences. Many modern cultures are deeply influenced by anthropocentrism. It's a big idea in environmental ethics and environmental philosophy. Some people believe it's a main reason for many environmental problems caused by human actions on Earth.

However, some who support anthropocentrism say this isn't always true. They argue that a good long-term view means making sure the Earth stays healthy for humans. They believe the real problem is "shallow anthropocentrism," which means only thinking about short-term human needs, not long-term well-being.

Anthropocentrism and the Environment

Some environmentalists believe that anthropocentrism is why humans often try to control and "develop" most of the Earth. They see it as a hidden reason behind many human actions that affect the planet.

In environmental philosophy, anthropocentrism is often seen as a major issue. It highlights how traditional Western ways of thinking might be biased towards humans, shaping how we see ourselves and the non-human world.

Some thinkers, like John Passmore, have been criticized for their anthropocentric views. They argue that keeping a healthy environment is important for human well-being, rather than for nature's own sake. William Grey, for example, said that the problem with "shallow" views isn't that they care about humans, but that they don't think enough about what human well-being truly means. He suggested we need a stronger, more complete idea of human interest.

Many environmentalists still have a somewhat anthropocentric view. They argue for protecting the environment because it benefits human populations. They believe that human flourishing is part of a healthy, diverse planet. However, some say this view is very similar to deep ecology and biocentrism, which focus on the value of all life, not just human life.

Religious Views

Some Christian supporters of anthropocentrism base their beliefs on the Bible. For example, in the Book of Genesis, verse 1:26 says:

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

The word "dominion" here has been used to support an anthropocentric view. However, some people now question this, thinking it might be a mistranslation from the original Hebrew. Others argue that the Bible actually puts all importance on God as the creator, and humans are just one part of creation.

Human Rights and Anthropocentrism

Anthropocentrism is also a foundation for some ideas about human rights. Those who defend anthropocentrism argue that it's a necessary starting point to protect universal human rights. They believe that simply being human is what gives us moral importance.

For example, philosopher Mortimer J. Adler wrote that if humans didn't believe they had a special moral status, the basis for their freedoms would disappear. He suggested that if humans thought they weren't unique, stronger groups might try to justify treating weaker human groups like animals.

Author Wesley J. Smith, who supports anthropocentrism, believes that human exceptionalism (the idea that humans are special) is what creates our duties to each other, to the natural world, and to treat animals kindly. He argues that because humans are unique and can understand right from wrong, we are the only species capable of ethical behavior towards animals.

Animal Rights and Welfare

Anthropocentrism has been criticized by people who advocate for animal rights and welfare. They argue that the belief that humans are more important than other animals is wrong. They believe that non-human animals, like humans, have their own value.

One early critic was zoologist J. Howard Moore. In his 1906 book The Universal Kinship, he wrote that Charles Darwin's ideas showed that anthropocentrism was outdated. He believed that the idea of a huge mental gap between humans and other animals was just "pure fiction" and came from human selfishness.

Philosophers like Peter Singer and David Pearce argue against anthropocentric ethics. They support ideas like antispeciesism or sentientism. These ideas suggest that all beings who can feel pain or pleasure should be treated equally, regardless of their species. This means that equally strong interests should matter equally.

How We Think About Nature

In cognitive psychology, "anthropocentric thinking" means we tend to understand unfamiliar animals or natural processes by comparing them to humans. It's easy to use our own human experiences to understand other living things.

For example, because death is usually seen as bad for humans, we might wrongly think that death at a cellular level or in nature is also bad. But in reality, things like programmed cell death are essential for life, and ecosystems also depend on death. On the other hand, this thinking can also make us wrongly assume that animals very different from us, like insects, don't share basic biological traits like reproduction or blood circulation.

This type of thinking has been studied in young children. Even children as young as 6 have been found to give human traits to animals or plants they don't know well. While less is known about how much this continues into adulthood, evidence shows it can persist even in biology students.

The idea that anthropocentric thinking is something we are born with has been questioned. Studies of children in cities suggest it might be learned between ages 3 and 5. How much children use this thinking seems to depend on their experiences with nature and their culture's views on humans' place in the natural world. For instance, children who grew up in rural areas tend to use anthropocentric thinking less because they are more familiar with different species. Studies of children from some indigenous peoples of the Americas have found very little anthropocentric thinking. They often see living things based on how they are related, their role in the environment, and their spiritual traditions, leading to a much less human-centered view of nature.

See Also

In Spanish: Antropocentrismo para niños