Anthropocentrism and the Debates Surrounding It in the Context of the Ecological Crisis

人类中心主义长期被指责为生态危机的根源，引发学界的持续争论。海华德主张，应区分人类中心主义、物种歧视主义和人类沙文主义，强调人类存续需求是推动生态保护的核心理据；科普尼娜等学者则批评这一立场为狭隘的功利主义。围绕这场争论展开的分析表明，自然多元的工具价值能充分支撑生态保护，同时考虑人类理想可以在不诉诸自然内在价值的条件下支持环境保护。由此，人类中心主义非但不会加剧生态危机，反而提供了契合可持续发展的伦理资源。Anthropocentrism has long been criticized as the root cause of ecological crises, sparking ongoing debate within the academic community. Tim Hayward advocates for a distinction between anthropocentrism, speciesism, and human chauvinism, arguing that the need for human survival is the core rationale for ecological conservation. Conversely, scholars like Helen Kopnina critique this position as narrow utilitarianism. Analysis of this debate reveals that the instrumental value of nature’s diversity is sufficient to support ecological conservation, and that human ideals can underpin environmental protection without invoking the intrinsic value of nature. Consequently, rather than exacerbating ecological crises, anthropocentrism offers ethical resources compatible with sustainable development.