English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Latour combines “the anthropocene” and “the Gaia Hypothesis” and comes up with his Gaia Theory: On the one hand, Latour believes that humans will be an important force in regulating the earth system; on the other hand, Latour puts forward his own “relational ethics”, arguing that all laws or rules that Gaia follows should be realized through the interaction of actors, and “the parliament of things” can unify the domain of necessity and the domain of freedom and turn the opposition between fact and value into the difference between “taking into account” and “arranging in rank order”. His position of “relational ethics” alleviates the opposition between social construction orientation and naturalism orientation in ecological ethics. The mechanisms and principles proposed by “the parliament of things” are of great value in ecological ethics, but they are faced with problems, such as the effectiveness of representatives and whether the parliament can achieve substantial outcomes. The idea of “community of shared future for mankind”, as a Chinese plan for ecological governance, can provide new ideas for solving the above problems of “the parliament of things”.

The Ecological Ethical Implications of Latour’s Gaia Theory