Thinking Like a Mall: Environmental Philosophy after the End of Nature

by Steven Vogel

Environmentalism, in theory and practice, is concerned with protecting nature. But if we have now reached "the end of nature," as Bill McKibben and other environmental thinkers have declared, what is there left to protect? In "Thinking like a Mall," Steven Vogel argues that environmental thinking would be better off if it dropped the concept of "nature" altogether and spoke instead of the "environment" -- that is, the world that actually surrounds us, which is always a "built "world, the only one that we inhabit. We need to think not so much like a mountain (as Aldo Leopold urged) as like a mall. Shopping malls, too, are part of the environment and deserve as much serious consideration from environmental thinkers as do mountains.

Vogel argues provocatively that environmental philosophy, in its ethics, should no longer draw a distinction between the natural and the artificial and, in its politics, should abandon the idea that something beyond human practices (such as "nature") can serve as a standard determining what those practices ought to be. The appeal to nature distinct from the built environment, he contends, may be not merely unhelpful to environmental thinking but in itself harmful to that thinking. The question for environmental philosophy is not "how can we save nature?" but rather "what environment should we inhabit, and what practices should we engage in to help build it?"

Genres: Philosophy, Environment

283 pages, Hardcover

First published June 5, 2015

About the author

Steven Vogel is a Professor of Philosophy at Denison University.

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name:
(1) Steven Vogel - Biology
(2) Steven Vogel - Fashion
(3) Steven Vogel - Critical thought

Reviews

[Yanick Punter · Rating 4 out of 5]

After this I refuse to speak of nature, but it seems the bastard is robust. Had its moments; can recommend.

[Anaum Virani · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the body of environmental ethics work, this is one of my favorites, because I felt like I was saying something new. Thinking Like a Mall from its inception tackles the struggle of defining nature. Alluding to the “end of nature”, Vogel propose there is no longer such as thing as nature, because humans have caused such massive changes by their s and behaviors; that humans have altered everything (including all forms of plant and animal life) on earth. Vogel’s postnaturalist environmentalism hence decenters this abstract concept of “nature,” and focuses instead on the needs to consider the built environment people inhabit. He deviates from environmentalists like Paul Taylor in his discussion of the "environment", instead offering an environmentalism that can persist without traditional views of nature; trading forests and rivers for cities and malls. In his book, Vogel challenges the common view of malls as inanimate structures by suggesting they share similarities with animate beings. Unlike the biocentric individualism promoted by Paul Taylor, Vogel argues that malls show signs of autonomy and unpredictability, similar to living things. This challenges the idea that malls are solely controlled by human actions, highlighting their complexity and suggesting they have a life of their own (Vogel 146). While Taylor rejects the independence of nature, Vogel believes nature to be transcendent of human control and will.

[Julius · Rating 4 out of 5]

Das Buch lässt sich vielleicht folgendermaßen zusammenfassen: "Natur" als Konzept ist schlecht definierbar (alles, außer das vom Menschen Geschaffene; alles nicht Menschliche). Lieber soll "Umwelt" verwendet werden. Es gibt nämlich nichts vom Menschen Unberührtes mehr.

Die "Mall"-Analogie geht etwa so: Es gibt vom Menschen Beabsichtigtes, aber die Welt ist komplex und am Ende verselbstständigt sich doch alles. Es ist eine Replik auf Aldo Leopolds "Think like a mountain" (in "A sand county almanach"), was Vorhersehbarkeit der Auswirkungen des eigenen Handelns impliziert und externe Einflüsse ignoriert.

Das letzte Kapitel ist dann vor allem ein Plädoyer für Demokratie, unabhängig von Umweltfragen.

Auch wenn es relativ langwierig ist und auf den immergleichen Autoren zurückgreift (nämlich Bill McKibben und dessen "The end of nature"), ist es doch ganz gut zu lesen und schlüssig. Außerdem ist es erfrischend, dass es nicht mit Handlungsempfehlungen schließt sondern lediglich eine Einordnung der Umwelt (in beidem Sinne) versucht.

[Tom Booker · Rating 4 out of 5]

The earlier chapters on nature being a social construct, and Marxist alienation were very insightful. I think the book becomes more predictable further along. It's the sort of book that helps if you read in order (though I found the chapters to be relatively loosely tied together), but you could equally read any chapter and I think it would make sense if you didn't read any others.

To summarise some key takeaways:
- 'nature' (independent of humans) doesn't exist, and Nature is nothing to worry about (it just is)
- 'nature' is a social construct (it is literally physically constructed through social processes)
- a mall or any 'artificial' creation can have as much intrinsic value as something 'natural'
- politics (discourse) is the only way to solve the tragedy of the commons, not acting individually (in the market)

[Aaron · Rating 4 out of 5]

is it a false dichotomy to separate man-made environs from what we call natural environs? could be.

vogel illustrates the importance of recognising the link between man-made and natural environs in order to achieve more awesome environmental outcomes, identifying the dualistic view as unhelpful in solving environmental issues.

it's nice to have human-impact framed as a tool to solve environmental issues rather than an inconvenient truth to be managed.

[G · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thought-provoking little book. Vogel explores the contradictory usages of the term "nature," and ultimately concludes it is a useless metric for practicable environmental philosophy (contrasting it with the term "environment," and holding the two terms as analogous to the Kantian noumenal/phenomenal distinction). After, the concept of social constructionism is explored to reframe the popular narrative of "alienation from nature" towards "alienation from the built environment" (which we created, and did so for others).

Later chapters examine the concept of artifacts, the intertwined nature of nonhuman ecological systems and built human ones, and so on based on a sort of active materialism (with particular influence from Marx and Heidegger).

I appreciated the readability of the volume, which helped open my eyes to the shortcomings of common societal perspectives on nature and the purpose of environmentalism.