Environmental psychology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Environmental psychology is an interdisciplinary field that focuses on the interplay between individuals and their surroundings. The field defines the term environment broadly, encompassing natural environments, social settings, built environments, learning environments, and informational environments.

Since its conception, the field has been committed to the development of a discipline that is both value oriented and problem oriented, prioritizing research aimed at solving complex environmental problems in the pursuit of individual well-being within a larger society.^[1] When solving problems involving human-environment interactions, whether global or local, one must have a model of human nature that predicts the environmental conditions under which humans will respond well. This model can help design, manage, protect and/or restore environments that enhance reasonable behavior, predict the likely outcomes when these conditions are not met, and diagnose problem situations. The field develops such a model of human nature while retaining a broad and inherently multidisciplinary focus. It explores such dissimilar issues as common property resource management, wayfinding in complex settings, the effect of environmental stress on human performance, the characteristics of restorative environments, human information processing, and the promotion of durable conservation behavior. Lately, alongside the increased focus on climate change in society and the social sciences and the re-emergence of limits-to-growth concerns, there has been increased focus on environmental sustainability issues within the field.^[2]

This multidisciplinary paradigm has not only characterized the dynamic for which environmental psychology is expected to develop. It has also been the catalyst in attracting other schools of knowledge in its pursuit, aside from research psychologists. Geographers, economists, landscape architects, policy-makers, sociologists, anthropologists, educators, and product developers all have discovered and participated in this field.^[1]

Although "environmental psychology" is arguably the best-known and most comprehensive description of the field, it is also known as human factors science, cognitive ergonomics, ecological psychology, ecopsychology, environment–behavior studies, and person–environment studies. Closely related fields include architectural psychology, socio-architecture, behavioral geography, environmental sociology, social ecology, and environmental design research.

History

The origins of this field of study are unknown, however, Willy Hellpach is said to be the first to mention "environmental psychology". One of his books, Geopsyche, discusses topics such as how the sun and the moon affect human activity, the impact of extreme environments, and the effects of color and form (Pol, E., 2006, Blueprints for a history of environmental psychology (I): From first birth to American transition. "Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano", 7(2), 95-113). Among the other major scholars at the roots of environmental psychology were Jakob von Uexküll, Kurt Lewin, Egon Brunswik, and later Gerhard Kaminski and Carl Friedrich Graumann.^[3]

The end of World War II brought about a higher demand for developments in the field of social psychology particularly in the areas of attitude change, small group processes, and intergroup conflict. This demand caused psychologists to begin applying social psychology theories to a number of social issues such as prejudice, war and peace. It was thought that if these problems were addressed, underlying notions and principles would surface.

Although this period was crucial to the development of the field, the methodologies used to carry out the studies were questionable.^{[according to whom?]} At the time, studies were being conducted in a laboratory setting, which caused some doubt^{[to whom?]} as to their validity in the real world. Consequently, environmental psychologists began to conduct studies outside of the laboratory, enabling the field to continue to progress.^{[citation needed]} Today environmental psychology is being applied to many different areas such as architecture and design, television programs and advertisements. ^[4]

Orientations

Problem oriented

Environmental psychology is a direct study of the relationship between an environment and how that environment affects its inhabitants. Specific aspects of this field work by identifying a problem and through the identification of said problem, discovering a solution. Therefore, it is necessary for environmental psychology to be problem oriented.

One important aspect of a problem-oriented field is that by identifying problems, solutions arise from the research acquired. The solutions can aid in making society function better as a whole and create a wealth of knowledge about the inner workings of societies. Environmental psychologist Harold Proshansky discusses how the field is also "value oriented" because of the field's commitment to bettering society through problem identification.^[5] Proshansky discusses the importance of not only understanding the problem but also the necessity of a solution. Proshansky also points out some of the problems of a problem-oriented approach for environmental psychology. First the problems being identified must be studied under certain specifications: it must be ongoing and occurring in real life, not in a laboratory. Second, the notions about the problems must derive directly from the source – meaning they must come directly from the specific environment where the problem is occurring.^[5] The solutions and understanding of the problems cannot come from an environment that has been constructed and modeled to look like real life. Environmental psychology needs to reflect the actual society not a society built in a laboratory setting. The difficult task of the environmental psychologist is to study problems as they are occurring in everyday life.^[6] It is hard to reject all laboratory research because laboratory experiments are where theories may be tested without damaging the actual environment or can serve as models when testing solutions. Proshansky makes this point as well, discussing the difficulty in the overall problem oriented approach. He states that it is important, however, for the environmental psychologist to utilize all aspects of research and analysis of the findings and to take into account both the general and individualized aspects of the problems.^[7]

Environmental psychology addresses environmental problems such as density and crowding, noise pollution, sub-standard living, and urban decay.^[5] Noise increases environmental stress. Although it has been found that control and predictability are the greatest factors in stressful effects of noise; context, pitch, source and habituation are also important variables [3]. Environmental psychologists have theorized that density and crowding can also have an adverse effect on mood and may cause stress-related illness. To understand and solve environmental problems, environmental psychologists believe concepts and principles should come directly from the physical settings and problems being looked at.^[5] For example, factors that reduce feelings of crowding within buildings include:

• Windows – particularly ones that can be opened and ones that provide a view as well as light
• High ceilings
• Doors to divide spaces (Baum and Davies)^{[full citation needed]} and provide access control
• Room shape – square rooms feel less crowded than rectangular ones (Dresor)^{[full citation needed]}
• Using partitions to create smaller, personalized spaces within an open plan office or larger work space.
• Providing increases in cognitive control over aspects of the internal environment, such as ventilation, light, privacy, etc.
• Conducting a cognitive appraisal of an environment and feelings of crowding in different settings. For example, one might be comfortable with crowding at a concert but not in school corridors.
• Creating a defensible space (Calhoun)^{[full citation needed]}

Personal space and territory

Having an area of personal territory in a public space, e.g., at the office, is a key feature of many architectural designs. Having such a 'defensible space' can reduce the negative effects of crowding in urban environments. The term, coined by John B. Calhoun in 1947, is the result of multiple environmental experiments conducted on rats. Originally beginning as an experiment to measure how many rats could be accommodated in a given space, it expanded into determining how rats, given the proper food, shelter and bedding would behave under a confined environment.

Under these circumstances, the males became aggressive, some exclusively homosexual. Others became pansexual and hypersexual, seeking every chance to mount any rat they encountered. As a result, mating behaviors were upset with an increase in infant mortalities. With parents failing to provide proper nests, thoughtlessly ditching their young and even attacking them, infant mortality rose as high as 96% in certain sections. Calhoun published the results as "Population Density and Social Pathology" in a 1962 edition of Scientific American.^[8]

Creating barriers and customizing the space are ways of creating personal space, e.g., using pictures of one's family in an office setting. This increases cognitive control as one sees oneself as having control over the competitors to the personal space and therefore able to control the level of density and crowding in the space.

Systems oriented

The systems oriented approach to experimenting is applied to individuals or people that are a part of communities, groups, and organizations. This approach particularly examines group interaction, as opposed to an individual's interaction and it emphasizes on factors of social integration. In the laboratory, experiments focus on cause and effect processes within human nature.^[9]

Interdisciplinary oriented

Environmental psychology relies on interaction with other disciplines in order to approach problems with multiple perspectives. The first discipline is the category of behavioral sciences, which include: sociology, political science, anthropology, and economics. Environmental psychology also interacts with the interspecializations of the field of psychology, which include: developmental psychology, cognitive science, industrial and organizational psychology, psychobiology, psychoanalysis,^[10] and social neuroscience. In addition to the more scientific fields of study, environmental psychology also works with the design field which includes: the studies of architecture, interior design, urban planning, industrial and object design, landscape architecture, and preservation.^[11]

Space-over-time orientation

Space over time orientation highlights the importance of the past. Examining problems with the past in mind creates a better understanding of how past forces, such as social, political, and economic forces, may be of relevance to present and future problems.^[12] Time and place are also important to consider. It's important to look at time over extended periods. Physical settings change over time; they change with respect to physical properties and they change because individuals using the space change over time.^[13] Looking at these spaces over time will help monitor the changes and possibly predict future problems.

There are a variety of tests that can be administered to children in order to determine their temperament. Temperament is split up into three types: "easy", "difficult", and "slow-to-warm-up". Alexander Thomas, Stella Chess, Herbert G. Birch, Margaret Hertzig and Sam Korn created an infant temperament test in the 1950s and rated them using nine temperament criteria.^[14] By finding out a child's temperament at birth, it enables us to know what to expect as the child progresses into adulthood.

Concepts

Place identity

For many years Harold Proshansky and his colleagues at the Graduate School and University Center of the City University of New York, explored the concept of place identity. Place identity has been traditionally defined as a 'sub-structure of the self-identity of the person consisting of broadly conceived cognitions about the physical world in which the individual lives'.^[15] These cognitions define the daily experiences of every human being. Through one's attitudes, feelings, ideas, memories, personal values and preferences toward the range and type of physical settings, he/she can then understand the environment they live in and their overall experience.

As a person interacts with various places and spaces, he/she is able to evaluate which properties in different environments fulfill his/her various needs. When a place contains components that satisfy a person biologically, socially, psychologically and/or culturally, it creates the environmental past of a person. Through 'good' or 'bad' experiences with a place, a person is then able to reflect and define their personal values, attitudes, feelings and beliefs about the physical world.

Place identity has been described as the individual's incorporation of place into the larger concept of self; a "potpourri of memories, conceptions, interpretations, ideas, and related feelings about specific physical settings, as well as types of settings".^[16] Other theorists have been instrumental in the creation of the idea of place identity. Three humanistic geographers, Tuan (1980), Relph (1976) and Buttimer (1980),^{[full citation needed]} share a couple of basic assumptions. As a person lives and creates memories within a place, attachment is built and it is through one's personal connection to a place, that he/she gains a sense of belonging and purpose, which then gives significance and meaning to their life.

Five central functions of place-identity have been depicted: recognition, meaning, expressive-requirement, mediating change, and anxiety and defense function. Place identity becomes a cognitive "database" against which every physical setting is experienced.^[16] The activities of a person often overlap with physical settings, which then create a background for the rest of life's interactions and events. The individual is frequently unaware of the array of feelings, values or memories of a singular place and simply becomes more comfortable or uncomfortable with certain broad kinds of physical settings, or prefers specific spaces to others. In the time since the term "place identity" was introduced, the theory has been the model for identity that has dominated environmental psychology.

Place attachment

Many different perceptions of the bond between people and places have been hypothesized and studied. The most widespread terms include place attachment^[17] and sense of place.^[18] One consistent thread woven throughout most recent research on place attachment deals with the importance of the amount of time spent at a certain place (the length of association with a place). While both researchers and writers^[19] have made the case that time and experience in a place are important for deepening the meanings and emotional ties central to the person-place relationship, little in-depth research has studied these factors and their role in forging this connection.^[20]

Place attachment is defined as one's emotional or affective ties to a place, and is generally thought to be the result of a long-term connection with a certain environment.^[21] This is different from a simple aesthetic response such as saying a certain place is special because it is beautiful. For example, one can have an emotional response to a beautiful (or ugly) landscape or place, but this response may sometimes be shallow and fleeting. This distinction is one that Schroeder labeled "meaning versus preference". According to Schroeder the definition of "meaning" is "the thoughts, feelings, memories and interpretations evoked by a landscape"; whereas "preference" is "the degree of liking for one landscape compared to another".^[22] For a deeper and lasting emotional attachment to develop (Or in Schroeder's terms, for it to have meaning) an enduring relationship with a place is usually a critical factor.^[23] Chigbu carried out a rural study of place-attachment using a qualitative approach to check its impact on a community, Uturu (in Nigeria), and found that it has direct relationship to level of community development.^[24]

Environmental consciousness

Leanne Rivlin theorized that one way to examine an individual's environmental consciousness is to recognize how the physical place is significant, and look at the people/place relationship.

Environmental cognition (involved in human cognition) plays a crucial role in environmental perception. All different areas of the brain engage with environmentally relevant information. Some believe that the orbitofrontal cortex integrates environmentally relevant information from many distributed areas of the brain. Due to its anterior location within the frontal cortex, the orbitofrontal cortex may make judgments about the environment, and refine the organism's "understanding" through error analysis, and other processes specific to prefrontal cortex. But to be certain, there is no single brain area dedicated to the organism's interactions with its environment. Rather, all brain areas are dedicated to this task. One area (probably the orbitofrontal cortex) may collate the various pieces of the informational puzzle in order to develop a long term strategy of engagement with the ever-changing "environment." Moreover, the orbitofrontal cortex may show the greatest change in blood oxygenation (BOLD level) when an organism thinks of the broad, and amorphous category referred to as "the environment."^[25] Because of the recent concern with the environment, environmental consciousness or awareness has come to be related to the growth and development of understanding and consciousness toward the biophysical environment and its problems.^{[citation needed]}

Behavior settings

The earliest noteworthy discoveries in the field of environmental psychology can be dated back to Roger Barker who created the field of ecological psychology. Founding his research station in Oskaloosa, Kansas in 1947, his field observations expanded into the theory that social settings influence behavior. Empirical data gathered in Oskaloosa from 1947 to 1972 helped him develop the concept of the "behavior setting" to help explain the relationship between the individual and the immediate environment. This was further explored in his work with Paul Gump in the book Big School, Small School: High School Size and Student Behavior.^{[citation needed]} One of the first insightful explanations on why groups tend to be less satisfying for their members as they increase in size, their studies illustrated that large schools had a similar number of behavior settings to that of small schools. This resulted in the students' ability to presume many different roles in small schools (e.g. be in the school band and the school football team) but in larger schools there was a propensity to deliberate over their social choices.

In his book Ecological Psychology (1968) Barker stresses the importance of the town's behavior and environment as the residents' most ordinary instrument of describing their environment. "The hybrid, eco-behavioral character of behavior settings appear to present Midwest's inhabitants with no difficulty; nouns that combine milieu and standing behavior are common, e.g. oyster supper, basketball game, turkey dinner, golden gavel ceremony, cake walk, back surgery, gift exchange, livestock auction, auto repair."^[26]

Barker argued that his students should implement T-methods (psychologist as 'transducer': i.e. methods in which they studied man in his 'natural environment') rather than O-methods (psychologist as "operators" i.e. experimental methods). Basically, Barker preferred fieldwork and direct observation rather than controlled experiments. Some of the minute-by-minute observations of Kansan children from morning to night, jotted down by young and maternal graduate students, may be the most intimate and poignant documents in social science. Barker spent his career expanding on what he called ecological psychology, identifying these behavior settings, and publishing accounts such as One Boy's Day (1952) and Midwest and Its Children (1955).

Applications

Impact on the built environment

Environmental psychologists rejected the laboratory-experimental paradigm because of its simplification and skewed view of the cause-and-effect relationships of human's behaviors and experiences. Environmental psychologists examine how one or more parameters produce an effect while other measures are controlled. It is impossible to manipulate real-world settings in a laboratory.^[1]

Environmental psychology is oriented towards influencing the work of design professionals (architects, engineers, interior designers, urban planners, etc.) and thereby improving the human environment.

On a civic scale, efforts towards improving pedestrian landscapes have paid off, to some extent, from the involvement of figures like Jane Jacobs and Copenhagen's Jan Gehl. One prime figure here is the late writer and researcher William H. Whyte. His still-refreshing and perceptive "City", based on his accumulated observations of skilled Manhattan pedestrians, provides steps and patterns of use in urban plazas.

The role and impact of architecture on human behavior is debated within the architectural profession. Views range from: supposing that people will adapt to new architectures and city forms; believing that architects cannot predict the impact of buildings on humans and therefore should base decisions on other factors; to those who undertake detailed precedent studies of local building types and how they are used by that society.

Environmental psychology has conquered the whole architectural genre which is concerned with retail stores and any other commercial venues that have the power to manipulate the mood and behavior of customers (e.g. stadiums, casinos, malls, and now airports). From Philip Kotler's landmark paper on Atmospherics and Alan Hirsch's "Effects of Ambient Odors on Slot-Machine Usage in a Las Vegas Casino", through the creation and management of the Gruen transfer, retail relies heavily on psychology, original research, focus groups, and direct observation. One of William Whyte's students, Paco Underhill, makes a living as a "shopping anthropologist". Most of this advanced research remains a trade secret and proprietary.

Organizations

• Project for Public Spaces (PPS) is a nonprofit organization that works to improve public spaces, particularly parks, civic centers, public markets, downtowns, and campuses. The staff of PPS is made up of individuals trained in environmental design, architecture, urban planning, urban geography, urban design, environmental psychology, landscape architecture, arts administration and information management. The organization has collaborated with many major institutions to improve the appearance and functionality of public spaces throughout the United States. In 2005, PPS co-founded The New York City Streets Renaissance, a campaign that worked to develop a new campaign model for transportation reform. This initiative implemented the transformation of excess sidewalk space in the Meatpacking District of Manhattan into public space. Also, by 2008, New York City reclaimed 49 acres (200,000 m²) of traffic lanes and parking spots away from cars and gave it back to the public as bike lanes and public plazas.^{[citation needed]}
• The Center for Human Environments at the CUNY Graduate Center is a research organization that examines the relationship between people and their physical settings. CHE has five subgroups that specialize in aiding specific populations: The Children's Environments Research Group, the Health and Society Research Group, the Housing Environments Research Group, the Public Space Research Group, and the Youth Studies Research Group.^[27]
• The most relevant scientific groups are the International Association of People-Environment Studies (IAPS) and the Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA).

Challenges

The field saw significant research findings and a fair surge of interest in the late 1970s and early 1980s, but has seen challenges of nomenclature, obtaining objective and repeatable results, scope, and the fact that some research rests on underlying assumptions about human perception, which is not fully understood. Being an interdisciplinary field is difficult because it lacks a solid definition and purpose. It is hard for the field to fit into organizational structures.^[28] In the words of Guido Francescato, speaking in 2000, environmental psychology encompasses a "somewhat bewildering array of disparate methodologies, conceptual orientations, and interpretations... making it difficult to delineate, with any degree of precision, just what the field is all about and what might it contribute to the construction of society and the unfolding of history."

Environmental psychology has not received nearly enough supporters to be considered an interdisciplinary field within psychology. Harold M. Proshanksy was one of the founders of environmental psychology and was quoted as saying "As I look at the field of environmental psychology today, I am concerned about its future. It has not, since its emergence in the early 1960s grown to the point where it can match the fields of social, personality, learning or cognitive psychology. To be sure, it has increased in membership, in the number of journals devoted to it, and even in the amount of professional organizational support it enjoys, but not enough so that one could look at any major university and find it to be a field of specialization in a department of psychology, or, more importantly, in an interdisciplinary center or institute".^[29]

University courses

• Antioch University New England Graduate School offers graduate programs involving environmental education through a planning approach. With environmental psychology being such a diverse field with many different approaches, students have a variety of programs to choose from.
• Arizona State University offers a master's in Environmental Resources, which takes more of a planning approach to the field.
• The Environmental Psychology Ph.D program at the CUNY Graduate Center takes a multidisciplinary approach to examining and changing "the serious problems associated with the urban environment with a view towards affecting public policy" using social science theory and research methods. The GC-CUNY was the first academic institution in the U.S. to grant a PhD in Environmental Psychology. As discussed in detail on the program website, "recent research has addressed the experiences of recently housed homeless people, the privatization of public space, socio-spatial conflicts, children's safety in the public environment, relocation, community based approaches to housing, the design of specialized environments such as museums, zoos, gardens and hospitals, the changing relationships between home, family and work, the environmental experiences of gay men and lesbians, and access to parks and other urban 'green spaces'."^[30] See also The Center for Human Environments.
• Cornell University's department of Design and Environmental Analysis offers undergraduate and graduate (Master of Science in Human Environment Relations, Master of Arts in Design, and Ph.D in Human Behavior and Design) studies in environmental psychology, interior design, sustainable design studies, human factors and ergonomics, and facility planning and management.^[31]
• Drexel University offers a Master of Science degree in Design Research. Of two degree paths, the Environmental Design and Health path includes study with community practitioners and researchers in design and related fields, including health, community design, and public policy. Research typically includes data collection and engaged research practices of design thinking and participatory design. This area of investigation has potential to create innovative health and educational partnerships, economic opportunities and neighborhood initiatives and relates to the strategic mission of the university to be highly engaged in civic sustainability.^[32]
• The Ohio State University City & Regional Planning Program, in the School of Architecture, offers a specialization in environmental psychology (urban design/physical planning and behavior) at both the master's and PhD level. Dissertations have examined such topics as environmental aesthetics, spatial cognition, ethnic enclaves, neighborhood decline, neighborhood satisfaction, restorative and livable places, and behavior change.
• Prescott College offers a master's program that incorporates a number of the foundations of environmental psychology as well. The sub-fields in which the program provides includes environmental education, environmental studies, ecology, botany, resource policy, and planning. Another description about the program is as follows: "(The program) Includes instruction in contextual theory; statistics; physiological, social, and psychological responses to natural and technological hazards and disease; environmental perception and cognition; loneliness and stress; and psychological aspects of environmental design and planning."^{[This quote needs a citation]}
• University of California, Irvine offers a doctoral specialization in Design & Behavior Research within the Department of Planning, Policy, and Design in the School of Social Ecology, and undergraduate coursework in Environmental Psychology offered jointly by the Departments of Psychology and Social Behavior, Planning, Policy, and Design, and the Program in Public Health.^[33]
• The University of Michigan offers Master of Science and Master of Arts degrees in its new School for Sustainability and Environment (SEAS). The focus is on how people affect and are affected by environments, and includes a pragmatic approach to promoting environmental stewardship behavior, as well as a focus on how "nearby nature" affects people's mental vitality, physical health and well-being. An emerging theme is helping people to remain optimistic while learning to respond well to increasingly difficult biophysical circumstances.
• Another strain of environmental psychology developed out of ergonomics in the 1960s. The beginning of this movement can be traced back to David Canter's work and the founding of the "Performance Research Unit" at the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1966, which expanded traditional ergonomics to study broader issues relating to the environment and the extent to which human beings were "situated" within it (cf situated cognition). Canter led the field in the UK for years and was the editor of the Journal of Environmental Psychology for over 20 years, but has recently turned his attention to criminology.
• The University of Surrey was the first institution that offered an architectural psychology course in the UK starting in 1973. Since then, there have been over 250 graduates from over 25 countries. The Environmental Psychology Research Group (EPRG) within the University of Surrey, of which students on the M.Sc in Environmental Psychology are automatically members, has been undertaking research for more than thirty years. EPRG's mission is to gain a better understanding of the environmental and psychological effects of space, no matter the size, with help from social sciences, psychology, and methodologies. There are four categories under which the research projects fall: sustainable development, environmental risk, architectural assessment and environmental design, and environmental education and interpretation. Other universities in the UK now offer courses on the subject, which is an expanding field.

See the APA's list of additional environmental psychology graduate programs here: http://www.apadivisions.org/division-34/about/resources/graduate-programs.aspx

Other contributors

Other significant researchers and writers in this field include:

• Irwin Altman Distinguished Professor Emeritus, University of Utah
• Robert Gifford, Ph.D. Department of Psychology University of Victoria. Current Editor of the Journal of Environmental Psychology and author of Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice (5th edition, 2014).
• James J. Gibson, Best known for coining the word affordance, a description of what the environment offers the animal in terms of action
• Roger Hart Professor of Environmental Psychology, Director of the Center for Human Environments and the Children's Environments Research Group, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
• Rachel and Stephen Kaplan Professors of psychology at the University of Michigan, the Kaplans are known for their research on the effect of nature on people's relationships and health, including Attention Restoration Theory and are renowned in the field of environmental psychology
• Cindi Katz Professor of Environmental Psychology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
• Dak Kopec Professor and Director of Design for Human Health, Boston Architectural College, Boston MA; Author Environmental Psychology for Design 2nd Edition (2012) and Health, Sustainability and The Built Environment (2008).
• Setha Low Professor of Environmental Psychology and Director of the Public Space Research Group, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
• Kevin A. Lynch and his research into the formation of mental maps
• Francis T. McAndrew Cornelia H. Dudley Professor of Psychology at Knox College and author of "Environmental Psychology" (1993).
• Bill Mollison developed the Environmental Psychology Unit at the University of Tasmania, and also Permaculture with David Holmgren
• Amos Rapoport Distinguished Professor Emeritus Department of Architecture
• Leanne Rivlin Professor of Environmental Psychology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
• Susan Saegert, Director of the Environmental Psychology PhD Program and of the Housing Environments Research Group at the City University of New York
• Robert Sommer, a pioneer of the field who first studied personal space in the 1950s and is perhaps best known for his 1969 book Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of Design, but is also the author of numerous other books, including Design Awareness, and hundreds of articles.
• Daniel Stokols, Chancellor's Professor, School of Social Ecology, University of California, Irvine; edited Handbook of Environmental Psychology with Irwin Altman; author, Perspectives on Environment and Behavior; co-author, Health, Behavior, and Environmental Stress with Sheldon Cohen, Gary Evans, and David Krantz
• Allan Wicker, who expanded behavior setting theories to include other areas of study, including qualitative research, and social psychology.
• Gary Winkel Professor of Environmental Psychology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York
• James A. Swan professor, media producer and writer who authored one of the first popular articles on environmental education, produced symposiums on the Gaia Hypothesis and the significance of place, produced several documentary films on environmental topics and Co-Executive Producer of the "Wild Justice" TV series on the National Geographic Channel.

Google’s AI Guru Says That Great Artificial Intelligence Must Build on Neuroscience

Inquisitiveness and imagination will be hard to create any other way.

• by Jamie Condliffe
• July 20, 2017
• Original link:  https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608317/googles-ai-guru-says-that-great-artificial-intelligence-must-build-on-neuroscience/

Demis Hassabis knows a thing or two about artificial intelligence: he founded the London-based AI startup DeepMind, which was purchased by Google for $650 million back in 2014. Since then, his company has wiped the floor with humans at the complex game of Go and begun making steps towards crafting more general AIs.

But now he’s come out and said that be believes the only way for artificial intelligence to realize its true potential is with a dose of inspiration from human intellect.

Currently, most AI systems are based on layers of mathematics that are only loosely inspired by the way the human brain works. But different types of machine learning, such as speech recognition or identifying objects in an image, require different mathematical structures, and the resulting algorithms are only able to perform very specific tasks.

Building AI that can perform general tasks, rather than niche ones, is a long-held desire in the world of machine learning. But the truth is that expanding those specialized algorithms to something more versatile remains an incredibly difficult problem, in part because human traits like inquisitiveness, imagination, and memory don’t exist or are only in their infancy in the world of AI.

In a paper published today in the journal Neuron, Hassabis and three coauthors argue that only by better understanding human intelligence can we hope to push the boundaries of what artificial intellects can achieve.

First, they say, better understanding of how the brain works will allow us to create new structures and algorithms for electronic intelligence. Second, lessons learned from building and testing cutting-edge AIs could help us better define what intelligence really is.

The paper itself reviews the history of neuroscience and artificial intelligence to understand the interactions between the two. It argues that deep learning, which uses layers of artificial neurons to understand inputs, and reinforcement learning, where systems learn by trial and error, both owe a great deal to neuroscience.

But it also points out that more recent advances haven’t leaned on biology as effectively, and that a general intelligence will need more human-like characteristics—such as an intuitive understanding of the real world and more efficient ways of learning. The solution, Hassabis and his colleagues argue, is a renewed “exchange of ideas between AI and neuroscience [that] can create a 'virtuous circle' advancing the objectives of both fields.”

Hassabis is not alone in this kind of thinking. Gary Marcus, a professor of psychology at New York University and former director of Uber’s AI lab, has argued that machine-learning systems could be improved using ideas gathered by studying the cognitive development of children.

Even so, implementing those findings digitally won’t be easy. As Hassabis explains in an interview with the Verge, artificial intelligence and neuroscience have become “two very, very large fields that are steeped in their own traditions,” which makes it “quite difficult to be expert in even one of those fields, let alone expert enough in both that you can translate and find connections between them.”

(Read more: Neuron, The Verge, “Google’s Intelligence Designer,” “Can This Man Make AI More Human?”)

Ecopsychology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Ecopsychology studies the relationship between human beings and the natural world through ecological and psychological principles. The field seeks to develop and understand ways of expanding the emotional connection between individuals and the natural world, thereby assisting individuals with developing sustainable lifestyles and remedying alienation from nature. Theodore Roszak is credited with coining the term in his 1992 book, The Voice of the Earth, although a group of psychologists and environmentalists in Berkeley, including Mary Gomes and Allen Kanner, were independently using the term to describe their own work at the same time. Roszak, Gomes and Kanner later expanded the idea in the 1995 anthology Ecopsychology. Two other books were especially formative for the field, Paul Shepard's 1982 volume, "Nature and Madness," which explored the effect that our ever-diminishing engagement with wild nature had upon human psychological development, and philosopher David Abram's The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a More-than-Human World, published in 1996. The latter was the first widely read book to bring phenomenology to bear on ecological and ecopsychological issues, examining in detail the earthly dimensions of sensory experience, and disclosing the historical effect of formal writing systems upon the human experience of nature's agency, voice, and interiority.

A central premise of ecopsychology is that while today the human mind is affected and shaped by the modern social world, its deep structure is inevitably adapted to, and informed by, the more-than-human natural environment in which it evolved.^[2] According to the biophilia hypothesis of biologist E.O. Wilson, human beings have an innate instinct to connect emotionally with nature,^[3][4] particularly the aspects of nature that recall what evolutionary psychologists have termed the environment of evolutionary adaptiveness, the natural conditions that the human species evolved to inhabit.

The field of ecopsychology extends beyond the conventional purview of psychology, which had traditionally considered the psyche to be a matter of relevance to humans alone. Ecopsychology examines why people continue environmentally damaging behaviour, and to develop methods of positive motivation for adopting sustainable practices.^[3] Evidence suggests that many environmentally damaging behaviours are addictive at some level, and thus are more effectively addressed through positive emotional fulfillment rather than by inflicting shame. Other names used to refer to ecopsychology include depth ecology, Gaia psychology,^[5] psychoecology, ecotherapy, environmental psychology, green psychology, transpersonal ecology, global therapy, green therapy, Earth-centered therapy, reearthing, nature-based psychotherapy, shamanic counselling, ecosophy^[6] and sylvan therapy.

Practical benefits

Certain researchers propose that an individual's connection to nature can improve their interpersonal relationships and emotional wellbeing.^[5] An integral part of this practice is to remove psychotherapy, and the individual, from the interior of office buildings and homes and place them outdoors.^[3] According to the precepts of ecopsychology, a walk in the woods or a city park is refreshing because it is what humans evolved to do. Psychologists such as Roger Ulrich, Rachel and Stephen Kaplan, Frances Kuo and others have studied the beneficial effects of inhabiting natural settings and of looking at pictures of landscapes on the human psyche. Richard Louv's Last Child in the Woods: Saving our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder discusses in detail how the exposure of children to nature can assist in treating mental disorders, including attention deficit disorder.^[7] Community psychologist Guy Holmes' Walk and Talk groups have helped people with serious mental health diagnoses alongside other members of the general public to access the benefits of walking in green spaces in UK towns and cities.^[8]

Gardening is one way to experience the practical benefits of connecting with nature, particularly in the contexts of stress reduction, restoration, and awareness. Initial experimental research about stress-relieving effects showed subjects who gardened after situations of acute stress were able to fully recover from the event and their cortisol level measurements indicated positive mood increases after gardening.^[9] The psychological benefits of interactions with nature appear intensified at a smaller, more compressed scale in gardens, offering an accessible, fast-paced view of plant life cycles.^[10] Also, the practice of domestic gardening can improve sense of self-efficacy across ages, particularly among the elderly.^[11] Psychologists are also interested in the ways plants influence attention and healing. Plants are attributed as sources of positive distraction, shifting the focus from sensations of discomfort to aesthetic properties of plants, which creates perceived alleviation of pain.^[12] Individuals who have the opportunity to reconnect with nature through horticultural practices and in the wilderness can restore perceived sense of social connection, joy, and health.^[13] Interacting with nature is a practical preventative measure against mental-health issues that stem from rumination. When a group of participants in one study went on a walk in nature they expressed lower levels of rumination and showed diminished neural activity in the subgenual prefrontal cortex, an area tied to mental illness, while participants who walked through urban settings experienced no changes in either respect.^[14]

Another premise of ecopsychology is that steps taken to accept and notice nature can sharpen the senses and help people cultivate new skills. For example, the ability to track and navigate through a wilderness is improved if nature is noticed and accepted rather than feared. Similarly, ecopsychology proposes that sailors who appreciate the sea gain a keen sense for breeze directions. Psychologists have explored how senses subtly influence the brain in natural environments and impact a person's subjective well-being. Plants in the visual sphere affect the brain whether or not they are the object of focus and the blue and green hues of nature may contribute to low-anxiety psychological states.

Reasons to embrace nature

Ecopsychology explores how to develop emotional bonds with nature.^[1] It considers this to be worthwhile because when nature is explored and viewed without judgement, it gives the sensations of harmony, balance, timelessness and stability. Ecopsychology largely rejects reductionist views of nature that focus upon rudimentary building blocks such as genes, and that describe nature as selfish and a struggle to survive. Ecopsychology considers that there has been insufficient scientific description and exploration of nature, in terms of wildness, parsimony, spirituality and emotional ties. For example, parsimony is the best way to produce an evolutionary tree of the species (cladistics), suggesting that parsimonious adaptations are selected. Yet today, the brain is often seen as complicated and governed by inherited mind modules, rather than being a simple organ that looks for parsimony within the influences of its surroundings, resulting in the compaction in minds of a great diversity of concepts.

Cultures that embrace nature

In its exploration of how to bond with nature, ecopsychology is interested in the examples provided by a wide variety of ancient and modern cultures that have histories of embracing nature. Examples include aboriginal, pagan, Jain, Buddhist, and Hindu cultures, as well as shamanism and the more recent hesychast tradition. Of interest is how identity becomes entwined with nature, so that loss of those sacred places is far more devastating to indigenous people than often understood. Native American stories, in particular, illustrate a socially recognized sense of community between humans and the natural landscape.^[16] The Māori philosophy, and practice of kaitiakitanga, or eco-guardianship, and preservation emphasizes a deep connect between humans, and their environment.^[17] Eastern Orthodox monks led a contemplative life deeply intertwined with nature.^[18] Other lessons include how to live sustainably within an environment and the self-sacrifices made to tolerate natural limits, such as population control or a nomadic existence that allows the environment to regenerate. Moreover, certain indigenous cultures have developed methods of psychotherapy involving the presence of trees, rivers, and astronomical bodies.^[3]

Pain and delusions without nature

Ecopsychologists have begun detecting unspoken grief within individuals, an escalation of pain and despair, felt in response to widespread environmental destruction. The field of ecopsychology intends to illustrate how environmental disconnection functions as an aspect of existing pathologies, without creating a new category. The contention is that if a culture is disconnected from nature, then various aspects of an individual's life will be negatively impacted.^[3] It also believes that without the influence of nature, humans are prone to a variety of delusions, and that to some degree life in the wild forms the basis for human sanity and optimal psychological development. The topic is explored in detail Paul Shepard's book Nature and Madness. It is also proposed that separation from outdoor contact causes a loss of sensory and information-processing ability that was developed over the course of human evolution, which was spent in direct reciprocity with the environment.

Biophilia hypothesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The biophilia hypothesis also called BET suggests that humans possess an innate tendency to seek connections with nature and other forms of life. Edward O. Wilson introduced and popularized the hypothesis in his book, Biophilia (1984). He defines biophilia as "the urge to affiliate with other forms of life".

Love of living systems

The term "biophilia" means "love of life or living systems." It was first used by Erich Fromm to describe a psychological orientation of being attracted to all that is alive and vital.^[4] Wilson uses the term in the same sense when he suggests that biophilia describes "the connections that human beings subconsciously seek with the rest of life." He proposed the possibility that the deep affiliations humans have with other life forms and nature as a whole are rooted in our biology. Unlike phobias, which are the aversions and fears that people have of things in their environment, philias are the attractions and positive feelings that people have toward organisms, species, habitats, processes and objects in their natural surroundings. Although named by Fromm, the concept of biophilia has been proposed and defined many times over. Aristotle was one of many to put forward a concept that could be summarized as "love of life". Diving into the term philia, or friendship, Aristotle evokes the idea of reciprocity and how friendships are beneficial to both parties in more than just one way, but especially in the way of happiness.^[5]

In the book Children and Nature: Psychological, Sociocultural, and Evolutionary Investigations edited by Peter Kahn and Stephen Kellert,^[6] the importance of animals, especially those with which a child can develop a nurturing relationship, is emphasized particularly for early and middle childhood. Chapter 7 of the same book reports on the help that animals can provide to children with autistic-spectrum disorders.^[7]

Product of biological evolution

Human preferences toward things in nature, while refined through experience and culture, are hypothetically the product of biological evolution. For example, adult mammals (especially humans) are generally attracted to baby mammal faces and find them appealing across species. The large eyes and small features of any young mammal face are far more appealing than those of the mature adults. The biophilia hypothesis suggests that the positive emotional response that adult mammals have toward baby mammals across species helps increase the survival rates of all mammals.

Similarly, the hypothesis helps explain why ordinary people care for and sometimes risk their lives to save domestic and wild animals, and keep plants and flowers in and around their homes. In other words, our natural love for life helps sustain life.

Very often, flowers also indicate potential for food later. Most fruits start their development as flowers. For our ancestors, it was crucial to spot, detect and remember the plants that would later provide nutrition.

Biophilia and conservation

Because of our technological advancements and more time spent inside buildings and cars, it is argued that the lack of biophilic activities and time spent in nature may be strengthening the disconnect of humans from nature. Although, it also has shown strong urges among people to reconnect with nature. The concern for a lack of connection with the rest of nature outside of us, is that a stronger disregard for other plants, animals and less appealing wild areas could lead to further ecosystem degradation and species loss. Therefore, reestablishing a connection with nature has become more important in the field of conservation.^{[8][better source needed]} Examples would be more available green spaces in and around cities, more classes that revolve around nature and implementing smart design for greener cities that integrate ecosystems into them such as biophilic cities. These cities can also become part of wildlife corridors to help with migrational and territorial needs of other animals.^[9]

Development

The hypothesis has since been developed as part of theories of evolutionary psychology in the book The Biophilia Hypothesis edited by Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson^[10] and by Lynn Margulis. Also, Stephen Kellert's work seeks to determine common human responses to perceptions of, and ideas about, plants and animals, and to explain them in terms of the conditions of human evolution.

Biophilic design

In architecture, biophilic design is a sustainable design strategy that incorporates reconnecting people with the natural environment. It may be seen as a necessary complement to green architecture, which decreases the environmental impact of the built world but does not address human reconnection with the natural world.^[11] Caperna and Serafini^[12] define biophilic as that kind of architecture, which is able to supply our inborn need of connection to life and to the vital processes. According to Caperna and Serafini,^[13] Biophilic architecture is characterized by the following elements: i) the naturalistic dimension; (ii) the Wholeness ^[14] of the site, that is, "the basic structure of the place"; (iii) the "geometric coherency", that is, the physical space must have such a geometrical configuration able to exalt the connections human dimension and built and natural environments. Similarly, biophilic space has been defined as the environment that strengthens life and supports the sociological and psychological components,^[15][16] or, in other words, it is able to:^[17] (i) unburden our cognitive system, supporting it in collecting and recognizing more information in the quickest and most efficient way; (ii) foster the optimum of our sensorial system in terms of neuro-motorial influence, avoiding both the depressive and the exciting effects; (iii) induce a strengthening in emotive and biological terms at a neural level; (iv) support, according to the many clinical evidences, the neuro-endocryne and immunological system, especially for those people who are in bad physical condition.

Having a window looking out to plants is also claimed to help speed up the healing process of patients in hospitals.^[18] Similarly, having plants in the same room as patients in hospitals also speeds up their healing process.^[19]

Biophilia in fiction

Canadian author Hilary Scharper explicitly adapted E.O. Wilson's concept of biophilia for her ecogothic novel, Perdita.^[20] In the novel, Perdita (meaning "the lost one") is a mythological figure who brings biophilia to humanity.

Remote-controlled DNA nanorobots could lead to the first nanorobotic production factory

"Five orders of magnitude [hundreds of thousands times] faster than previously reported DNA-driven robotic systems"

January 19, 2018
Original link:  http://www.kurzweilai.net/remote-controlled-dna-nanorobots-could-lead-to-the-first-nanorobotic-production-factory

German researchers created a 55-nm-by-55-nm DNA-based molecular platform with a 25-nm-long robotic arm that can be actuated with externally applied electrical fields, under computer control. (credit: Enzo Kopperger et al./Science)

By powering a self-assembling DNA nanorobotic arm with electric fields, German scientists have achieved precise nanoscale movement that is at least five orders of magnitude (hundreds of thousands times) faster than previously reported DNA-driven robotic systems, they suggest today (Jan. 19) in the journal Science.

DNA origami has emerged as a powerful tool to build precise structures. But now, “Kopperger et al. make an impressive stride in this direction by creating a dynamic DNA origami structure that they can directly control from the macroscale with easily tunable electric fields—similar to a remote-controlled robot,” notes Björn Högberg of Karolinska Institutet in a related Perspective in Science, (p. 279).

The nanorobotic arm resembles the gearshift lever of a car. Controlled by an electric field (comparable to the car driver), short, single-stranded DNA serves as “latches” (yellow) to momentarily grab and lock the 25-nanometer-long arm into predefined “gear” positions. (credit: Enzo Kopperger et al./Science)

The new biohybrid nanorobotic systems could even act as a molecular mechanical memory (a sort of nanoscale version of the Babbage Analytical Engine), he notes. “With the capability to form long filaments with multiple DNA robot arms, the systems could also serve as a platform for new inventions in digital memory, nanoscale cargo transfer, and 3D printing of molecules.”
“The robot-arm system may be scaled up and integrated into larger hybrid systems by a combination of lithographic and self-assembly techniques,” according to the researchers. “Electrically clocked synthesis of molecules with a large number of robot arms in parallel could then be the first step toward the realization of a genuine nanorobotic production factory.”

Taking a different approach to a nanofactory, this “Productive Nanosystems: from Molecules to Superproducts” film — a collaborative project of animator and engineer John Burch and pioneer nanotechnologist K. Eric Drexler in 2005 — demonstrated key steps in a hypothetical process that converts simple molecules into a billion-CPU laptop computer. More here.

---

Abstract of A self-assembled nanoscale robotic arm controlled by electric fields

The use of dynamic, self-assembled DNA nanostructures in the context of nanorobotics requires fast and reliable actuation mechanisms. We therefore created a 55-nanometer–by–55-nanometer DNA-based molecular platform with an integrated robotic arm of length 25 nanometers, which can be extended to more than 400 nanometers and actuated with externally applied electrical fields. Precise, computer-controlled switching of the arm between arbitrary positions on the platform can be achieved within milliseconds, as demonstrated with single-pair Förster resonance energy transfer experiments and fluorescence microscopy. The arm can be used for electrically driven transport of molecules or nanoparticles over tens of nanometers, which is useful for the control of photonic and plasmonic processes. Application of piconewton forces by the robot arm is demonstrated in force-induced DNA duplex melting experiments.

References:

• Enzo Kopperger, Jonathan List, Sushi Madhira, Florian Rothfischer, Don C. Lamb, Friedrich C. Simmel. A self-assembled nanoscale robotic arm controlled by electric fields. Science 19 Jan 2018: Vol. 359, Issue 6373, pp. 296-301; DOI: 10.1126/science.aao4284

Biocentrism (ethics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Biocentrism (from Greek βίος bios, "life" and κέντρον kentron, "center"), in a political and ecological sense, as well as literally, is an ethical point of view that extends inherent value to all living things. It is an understanding of how the earth works, particularly as it relates to biodiversity. It stands in contrast to anthropocentrism, which centers on the value of humans. The related ecocentrism extends inherent value to the whole of nature.

Biocentrism does not imply the idea of equality among the animal kingdom, for no such notion can be observed in nature. Biocentric thought is nature based, not human based.

Advocates of biocentrism often promote the preservation of biodiversity, animal rights, and environmental protection. The term has also been employed by advocates of "left biocentrism", which combines deep ecology with an "anti-industrial and anti-capitalist" position (according to David Orton et al.).

Definition

The term biocentrism encompasses all environmental ethics that "extend the status of moral object from human beings to all living things in nature". Biocentric ethics calls for a rethinking of the relationship between humans and nature. It states that nature does not exist simply to be used or consumed by humans, but that humans are simply one species amongst many,^[6] and that because we are part of an ecosystem, any actions which negatively affect the living systems of which we are a part adversely affect us as well, whether or not we maintain a biocentric worldview. Biocentrists observe that all species have inherent value, and that humans are not "superior" to other species in a moral or ethical sense.

The four main pillars of a biocentric outlook are:

1. Humans and all other species are members of Earth's community.
2. All species are part of a system of interdependence.
3. All living organisms pursue their own "good" in their own ways.
4. Human beings are not inherently superior to other living things.^[8]

Relationship with animals and environment

Biocentrism views individual species as parts of the living biosphere. It observes the consequences of reducing biodiversity on both small and large scales and points to the inherent value all species have to the environment.

The environment is seen for what it is; the biosphere within which we live and depend on its diversity for our health. From these observations the ethical points are raised.

History and development

Biocentric ethics differs from classical and traditional ethical thinking. Rather than focusing on strict moral rules, as in Classical ethics, it focuses on attitudes and character. In contrast with traditional ethics, it is nonhierarchical and gives priority to the natural world rather than to humankind exclusively.^[9]

Biocentric ethics includes Albert Schweitzer's ethics of "Reverence for Life", Peter Singer's ethics of Animal Liberation and Paul Taylor's ethics of biocentric egalitarianism.^[5]

Albert Schweitzer's "reverence for life" principle was a precursor of modern biocentric ethics.^[5] In contrast with traditional ethics, the ethics of "reverence for life" denies any distinction between "high and low" or "valuable and less valuable" life forms, dismissing such categorization as arbitrary and subjective.^[5] Conventional ethics concerned itself exclusively with human beings—that is to say, morality applied only to interpersonal relationships—whereas Schweitzer's ethical philosophy introduced a "depth, energy, and function that differ[s] from the ethics that merely involved humans".^[5] "Reverence for life" was a "new ethics, because it is not only an extension of ethics, but also a transformation of the nature of ethics".^[5]

Similarly, Peter Singer argues that non-human animals deserve the same equality of consideration that we extend to human beings.^[10] His argument is roughly as follows:

1. Membership in the species Homo sapiens is the only criterion of moral importance that includes all humans and excludes all non-humans.
2. Using membership in the species Homo sapiens as a criterion of moral importance is completely arbitrary.
3. Of the remaining criteria we might consider, only sentience is a plausible criterion of moral importance.
4. Using sentience as a criterion of moral importance entails that we extend the same basic moral consideration (i.e. "basic principle of equality") to other sentient creatures that we do to human beings.
5. Therefore, we ought to extend to animals the same equality of consideration that we extend to human beings.^[10]

Biocentrism is most commonly associated with the work of Paul Taylor, especially his book Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics (1986).^[11] Taylor maintains that biocentrism is an "attitude of respect for nature", whereby one attempts to make an effort to live one's life in a way that respects the welfare and inherent worth of all living creatures.^[1] Taylor states that:^[11][12]

1. Humans are members of a community of life along with all other species, and on equal terms.
2. This community consists of a system of interdependence between all members, both physically, and in terms of relationships with other species.
3. Every organism is a "teleological centre of life", that is, each organism has a purpose and a reason for being, which is inherently "good" or "valuable".
4. Humans are not inherently superior to other species.

Historian Donald Worster traces today's biocentric philosophies, which he sees as part of a recovery of a sense of kinship between man and nature, to the reaction by the British intelligencia of the Victorian era against the Christian ethic of dominion over nature.^[13] He has pointed to Charles Darwin as an important spokesman for the biocentric view in ecological thought and quotes from Darwin's Notebook on Transmutation of Species (1837):^[14]

If we choose to let conjecture run wild, then animals, our fellow brethren in pain, diseases, death, suffering and famine—our slaves in the most laborious works, our companions in our amusement—they may partake of our origin in one common ancestor—we may be all netted together.

In 1859, Charles Darwin published his book On the Origin of Species. This publication sparked the beginning of biocentrist views by introducing evolution and "its removal of humans from their supernatural origins and placement into the framework of natural laws".^[15]

The work of Aldo Leopold has also been associated with biocentrism.^[16] The essay The Land Ethic in Leopold's book Sand County Almanac (1949) points out that although throughout history women and slaves have been considered property, all people have now been granted rights and freedoms.^[17] Leopold notes that today land is still considered property as people once were. He asserts that ethics should be extended to the land as "an evolutionary possibility and an ecological necessity".^[18] He argues that while people's instincts encourage them to compete with others, their ethics encourage them to co-operate with others.^[18] He suggests that "the land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land".^[18] In a sense this attitude would encourage humans to co-operate with the land rather than compete with it.

Outside of formal philosophical works biocentric thought is common among pre-colonial tribal peoples who knew no world other than the natural world.

In law

The paradigm of biocentrism and the values that it promotes are beginning to be used in law.

In recent years, cities in Maine, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and Virginia have adopted laws that protect the rights of nature.^[19] The purpose of these laws is to prevent the degradation of nature; especially by corporations who may want to exploit natural resources and land space, and to also use the environment as a dumping ground for toxic waste.^[19]

The first country to include rights of nature in its constitution is Ecuador^[20] (See 2008 Constitution of Ecuador). Article 71 states that nature "has the right to integral respect for its existence and for the maintenance and regeneration of its life cycles, structure, functions and evolutionary processes".^[21]

In religion

Islam

In Islam: In Islam, biocentric ethics stem from the belief that all of creation belongs to Allah (God), not humans, and to assume that non-human animals and plants exist merely to benefit humankind leads to environmental destruction and misuse.^[22] As all living organisms exist to praise God, human destruction of other living things prevents the earth's natural and subtle means of praising God. The Qur'an acknowledges that humans are not the only all-important creatures and emphasizes a respect for nature. Muhammad was once asked whether there would be a reward for those who show charity to nature and animals, to which he replied, "for charity shown to each creature with a wet heart [i.e. that is alive], there is a reward."^[23]

Hinduism

In Hinduism: Hinduism contains many elements of biocentrism. In Hinduism, humans have no special authority over other creatures, and all living things have souls ('atman'). Brahman (God) is the "efficient cause" and Prakrti (nature), is the "material cause" of the universe.^[22] However, Brahman and Prakrti are not considered truly divided: "They are one in [sic] the same, or perhaps better stated, they are the one in the many and the many in the one."^[22]

However, while Hinduism does not give the same direct authority over nature that the Judeo-Christian God grants, they are subject to a "higher and more authoritative responsibility for creation". The most important aspect of this is the doctrine of Ahimsa (non-violence). The Yājñavalkya Smṛti warns, "the wicked person who kills animals which are protected has to live in hell fire for the days equal to the number of hairs on the body of that animal".^[22] The essential aspect of this doctrine is the belief that the Supreme Being incarnates into the forms of various species. The Hindu belief in Saṃsāra (the cycle of life, death and rebirth) encompasses reincarnation into non-human forms. It is believed that one lives 84,000 lifetimes before one becomes a human. Each species is in this process of samsara until one attains moksha (liberation).

Another doctrinal source for the equal treatment of all life is found in the Rigveda. The Rigveda states that trees and plants possess divine healing properties. It is still popularly believed that every tree has a Vriksa-devata (a tree deity).Trees are ritually worshiped through prayer, offerings, and the sacred thread ceremony. The Vriksa-devata worshiped as manifestations of the Divine. Tree planting is considered a religious duty.^[22]

Jainism

In Jainism: The Jaina tradition exists in tandem with Hinduism and shares many of its biocentric elements.^[24]

Ahimsa (non-violence), the central teaching of Jainism, means more than not hurting other humans.^[25] It means intending not to cause physical, mental or spiritual harm to any part of nature. In the words of Mahavira: ‘You are that which you wish to harm.’^[25] Compassion is a pillar of non-violence. Jainism encourages people to practice an attitude of compassion towards all life.

The principle of interdependence is also very important in Jainism. This states that all of nature is bound together, and that "if one does not care for nature one does not care for oneself.".^[25]
Another essential Jain teaching is self-restraint. Jainism discourages wasting the gifts of nature, and encourages its practitioners to reduce their needs as far as possible. Gandhi, a great proponent of Jainism, once stated "There is enough in this world for human needs, but not for human wants."^[25]

Buddhism

In Buddhism: The Buddha's teachings encourage people "to live simply, to cherish tranquility, to appreciate the natural cycle of life".^[26] Buddhism emphasizes that everything in the universe affects everything else. "Nature is an ecosystem in which trees affect climate, the soil, and the animals, just as the climate affects the trees, the soil, the animals and so on. The ocean, the sky, the air are all interrelated, and interdependent—water is life and air is life."^[26]

Although this holistic approach is more ecocentric than biocentric, it is also biocentric, as it maintains that all living things are important and that humans are not above other creatures or nature. Buddhism teaches that "once we treat nature as our friend, to cherish it, then we can see the need to change from the attitude of dominating nature to an attitude of working with nature—we are an intrinsic part of all existence rather than seeing ourselves as in control of it."^[26]

Criticism

Biocentrism has faced criticism for a number of reasons. Some of this criticism grows out of the concern that biocentrism is an anti-human paradigm and that it will not hesitate to sacrifice human well-being for the greater good.^[20] Biocentrism has also been criticized for its individualism; emphasizing too much on the importance of individual life and neglecting the importance of collective groups, such as an ecosystem.^[27]

A more complex form of criticism focuses on the contradictions of biocentrism. Opposed to anthropocentrism, which sees humans as having a higher status than other species,^[28] biocentrism puts humans on a par with the rest of nature, and not above it.^[29] In his essay A Critique of Anti-Anthropocentric Biocentrism Richard Watson suggests that if this is the case, then "Human ways—human culture—and human actions are as natural as the ways in which any other species of animals behaves".^[30] He goes on to suggest that if humans must change their behavior to refrain from disturbing and damaging the natural environment, then that results in setting humans apart from other species and assigning more power to them.^[30] This then takes us back to the basic beliefs of anthropocentrism. Watson also claims that the extinction of species is "Nature's way"^[31] and that if humans were to instigate their own self-destruction by exploiting the rest of nature, then so be it. Therefore, he suggests that the real reason humans should reduce their destructive behavior in relation to other species is not because we are equals but because the destruction of other species will also result in our own destruction.^[32] This view also brings us back to an anthropocentric perspective.