Re-institutionalizing Ecocentrism: Integrating Local Ecological Wisdom and Reconciling Modern Science in Indonesia
In classical sociological studies, environmental discussions received little attention. Based on the anthropocentrism that placed humans at the center of discussion, nature was also isolated from sociological analysis. Marxism, Structural Functionalism, and Action Theory initially viewed nature solely as a static backdrop or a passive resource ready to be exploited to meet society’s material needs. This closedness of classical sociology to the biophysical dimension created a theoretical blindness that persisted for a long time within mainstream academic sociology.
The effects of environmental degradation often call into question some of the fundamental assumptions of development. Development is no longer understood in terms of endless capital accumulation, but must instead consider the inherent limitations of nature. Neglecting the Earth’s carrying capacity has given rise to global ecological crises, ranging from extreme climate change to biodiversity extinction, threatening the very existence of humanity. This objective reality compels sociologists to break down the barriers separating the social and biophysical worlds.
According to Shanty Novriaty, environmental sociology is still relatively young. It developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Although marked by the institutionalization of environmental sociology within various sociological associations, this subdiscipline remains fraught with debate. These epistemological debates center on the extent to which non-human factors should be integrated into sociological explanatory models without falling into biological reductionism or crude geographical determinism. This dynamic actually enriches sociology’s theoretical repertoire in responding to the global crisis.
Baca selengkapnya di :
Jangan Lewatkan
Tulisan Terbaru
