The human capacity to manipulate nature has increased dramatically over the last decades. The slow development of farming, gardening and breeding has been replaced by a proliferation of techniques in genetic engineering, chemical regulation and ecosystem (re)construction. The resulting blurring of the simple distinction between the human, the interactive and the natural domains has triggered societal debate and philosophical reflection. If the artifacts and topsoils of an agricultural area are removed and natural species colonize the place neatly according to plan, is that real nature? If an overactive child is sedated so as to facilitate the handling of the child, is that still the same child? If we manage a forest or a river so cleverly that the most beautiful trees and the most fishable fish spontaneously dominate the ecosystem, where then do we in fact walk and fish – in nature or in a pseudo zoo?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Netherlands is one of the few countries where childbirth is still practiced as a non-medicalized event, preferably (and in most actual cases) taking place under the supervision of a midwife rather than a gynaecologist.
References
Cheney, J. (1989). Postmodern environmental ethics. Ethics as bioregional narrative. Environmental Ethics, 11(2), 117–134.
Elliot, R. (1982). Faking nature. Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy and the Social Sciences, 28 (10), 81–93.
De Groot, W. T. (1992). Environmental science theory: Concepts and methods in a problem-oriented, one-world paradigm. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishing.
De Groot, W. T., Van den Born, R. J. G., & Lenders, R. H. J. (2006). Visions of nature. An introduction. In: R. J. G. Van den Born, R. H. J. Lenders, & W. T. De Groot (Eds.), Visions of nature. A scientific exploration of people’s implicit philosophies regarding nature in Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (pp. 7–18). Berlin: LIT-Verlag.
Katz, E. (1992). The big lie: The human restoration of nature. Research in Philosophy and Technology, 12, 231–241.
Midgley, M. (2004). The myths we live by. London, New York: Routledge.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (Eds.). (1997). Grounded theory in practice(p. 280). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Van den Born, R. J. G., Lenders, R. H. J., De Groot, W. T., & Huijsman, E. (2001). The New Biophilia: An exploration of visions of nature in Western countries. Environmental Conservation, 28(1), 65–75.
Van den Born, R. J. G. (2007). Thinking nature. Everyday philosophy of nature in the Netherlands. Dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen.
Van den Born, R. J. G. (2008). Rethinking nature: Public visions in the Netherlands. Environmental Values, 17 (1), 83–109.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Eva Kollee for conducting the interviews, and Sjoerd Reutelingsperger for the transcription of the interviews.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van den Born, R.J., de Groot, W.T. (2009). The Authenticity of Nature: An Exploration of Lay People’s Interpretations in the Netherlands. In: Drenthen, M., Keulartz, F., Proctor, J. (eds) New Visions of Nature. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2611-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2611-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-2610-1
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-2611-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)