Rolston, Holmes, 1932-, authorJinhua, Ke, authorChina Academic Journal Electronic Publishing House, publisher2022-02-152022-02-152021-08-28https://hdl.handle.net/10217/234394The introduction, interview, and paper were presented at the conference and are also published in Journal of Poyang Lake, no. 6, 2021.Introduction is in Chinese; interview and paper are in Chinese and English.Cataloger supplied title.Includes: Introduction to Holmes Rolston (in Chinese), Interview with Rolston (in Chinese and English), and Paper by Rolston (in Chinese and English), from the Shandong University Conference on Ecological Aesthetics and Ethics in the Post Epidemic Era on August 28-29, 2021, in the Journal of Poyang Lake in Jiangxi Academy of Social Sciences.Introduction to Holmes Rolston, presenter at the Shandong University Conference on Ecological Aesthetics and Ethics in the Post Epidemic Era on August 28-29, 2021.Interview by Jinhau Ke: Holmes Rolston III is a world-famous philosopher who claims himself to be "a philosopher going toward the wilderness". He has a deep love for the wilderness and his wilderness complex runs through his thought and life. He is one of the philosophers who have advanced the most in-depth discussion on the wilderness issue in the world. This interview focused on the concept of wilderness and wilderness protection. In this interview, Rolston emphasized the following points: wilderness is the part of nature that can maintain its spontaneity and its process of natural evolution; wilderness is "the root of the world of life", which breeds and supports all life, including human beings; wilderness is an originating source of value; wilderness is the other of human beings, which shapes human body and mind and enriches human soul and spiritual world; even highly developed human civilization needs to rely on wild Nature for support and maintenance. Rolston has always been committed to advocating a new ethics to guide the practice of wilderness protection. This new ethics proposes an inclusive love, disapproves of only viewing nature as a resource for human to make use of, and advocates that human beings, as the only moral agent in the world, should shoulder the responsibility and obligation of wilderness protection because wilderness protection is not only for the human's ecological well-being and sustainable development, but also for the goodness of the non-human life while the greater goal of wilderness preservation is to protect a sustainable biosphere. Wilderness is essential for the ecological civilization, and adequate wilderness protection is the sign of the maturity of ecological civilization. We hope that more people will pay attention to the wilderness and make "Wild China" an essential support for "beautiful China".Paper: By recent accounts human dominance is so extensive that Earth has entered a new age, the Anthropocene Epoch. A more considered future is celebrated in An Ecomodernist Manifesto, in which international environmental leaders hope for an ecologically vibrant planet. But humans may be unable to deal with climate change, finding it too hot to handle. Global warming is a consummate moral quandary. Enthusiasts for a synthetic Earth advocate that humans can and ought to manage their planet in their self-interest, geo-engineering Earth resourcefully. What kind of planet do we want? What kind of planet can we get? In neuroscience and social science, we may be told that our actions are the outcome of impulsive subconscious neural configurations. Anthropocene proponents claim that classical conservation has been socially unjust, we ought to enhance natural systems that benefit the the poor. But justice is not just-us. Past sustainable development, we must sustain the biosphere. On future Earth, humans ought to celebrate and preserve their Earth, the wonderland planet.Paper: By recent accounts human dominance is so extensive that Earth has entered a new age, the Anthropocene Epoch. A more considered future is celebrated in An Ecomodernist Manifesto, in which international environmental leaders hope for an ecologically vibrant planet. But humans may be unable to deal with climate change, finding it too hot to handle. Global warming is a consummate moral quandary. Enthusiasts for a synthetic Earth advocate that humans can and ought to manage their planet in their self-interest, geo-engineering Earth resourcefully. What kind of planet do we want? What kind of planet can we get? In neuroscience and social science, we may be told that our actions are the outcome of impulsive subconscious neural configurations. Anthropocene proponents claim that classical conservation has been socially unjust, we ought to enhance natural systems that benefit the the poor. But justice is not just-us. Past sustainable development, we must sustain the biosphere. On future Earth, humans ought to celebrate and preserve their Earth, the wonderland planet.born digitalintroductions (general sociological concept)interviewsarticleschiCopyright and other restrictions may apply. User is responsible for compliance with all applicable laws. For information about copyright law, please see https://libguides.colostate.edu/copyright.Rolston, Holmes, 1932-wildernessnatural evolutionhuman life supportnature and cultureecosystemsecosystem servicessustainable biospherewild Chinabeautiful ChinaAnthropocene EpochbiodiversityEcomodernist Manifestoglobal warminggeo-engineeringneurosciencesocial sciencesustainable developmentwonderland planetText