山林倫理是公民倫理－由「無痕山林」與〈失去山林的孩子〉談起

Woodland Ethics As Civic Virtue Ethics

劉久清(Chiu-Chin Liu)

山林倫理 ； 公民德行倫理 ； 多元他者 ； 無痕山林 ； 超越無痕山林 ； Woodland ethics ； civic virtue ethics ； many others ； Leave No Trace

應用倫理評論

64期（2018 / 04 / 01）

29 - 88

繁體中文

「無痕山林」倫理守則的提出，是因為有大量進入山林遊憩的人，對山林的保育、維護造成巨大威脅、傷害；但是，又有《失去山林的孩子》之類書籍，努力論證人與山林親近、走入山林的必要，進而推動、推廣進入山林之活動。對此，僅只宣導、實踐「無痕山林」，是否足以解決更多、更大量人口進入山林遊憩對山林的威脅？是值得探討的。何況，人類行為對山林之威脅，不只發生於在山林遊憩時，而是日常生活即在發生的，且實踐「無痕山林」固然可能減輕對山林的傷害，卻未必減輕對整個地球生態的傷害。因此，對山林之維護、保育必須由整個生態體系的層面著眼，而且並非只是進入山林遊憩者，乃是全體人民的責任。這也意味著，對於相關的倫理準則應如何制訂？訂定何種內容？訂定的準則應如何推廣？與山林相關的種種科技創新、發展與應用，不應再只是由政府、非政府組織與業界廠商決定，需有整個社會的全體成員共同參與商討、訂定相關的倫理準則、規範、教育實踐以及與進入山林遊憩活動相關的種種科技創新。一個能夠如此參與的人就是一個積極主動公民，而且是本於德行倫理，不只有彼此互為多元他者的體認，更能將山林亦視為我們自始即與之共同生活、成長、休戚相關的多元他者，而非我們主觀意志投射的客體、我們進行遊憩的場所或所以滿足人類需求的對象。唯有在這樣的認知下，才有可能在全體公民與政府、非政府組織、業界廠商共同合作下，發展出真正能夠使人類與山林共蒙利益，而不致相互損害且實際可行之倫理準則、科技創新。

The ethical code of the ＂Leave No Trace＂ was proposed because a large number of people who entered the woodland (mountains and forests) to recreation had caused great threats and injury to the conservation and maintenance of the woodland. However, there were books such as LAST CHILD IN THE WOODS: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder, and efforts to demonstrate the closeness of the woodland and the need to step into the woodland will further promote the activities of entering the woodland. In this regard, merely advocating and practicing ＂Leave No Trace＂ is enough to solve the threat of more people entering the mountain forests on the woodland? It is worth exploring. What's more, the threat of human actions to the woodland not only occurs when they are recreate in the woodland, but also occurs in daily life. However, practicing ＂Leave No Trace＂ may reduce the damage to the mountains and forests, but it may not necessarily reduce the damage to the entire earth ecology. Therefore, the maintenance and conservation of woodland must be in the overall ecological system level, and it is not just the people who enter the woodland to recreate, but the responsibility of the entire people. This also means that what kind of content should be formulated and set for relevant ethical standards? How should the proposed guidelines be promoted? The various technological innovations, developments, and applications related to mountain forests should no longer be solely determined by the government, nongovernmental organizations, and industry. All members of the entire society must participate in discussions and formulate relevant ethical guidelines, norms, educational practices and various scientific and technological innovations related to access to woodland recreation activities. A person who can participate in this way is an active citizen with virtue ethics. He is not only aware of each other as many others, the woodland is also considered as we have to live with it from the beginning, growth, solidarity with the many others, not objects that our subjective will projects, places we recreating, or objects that satisfy human needs. Only in this sense can it be possible to develop, with the cooperation of all citizens and governments, nongovernmental organizations and industry manufacturers, the ethical principles and technological innovations that will truly enable humanity and the forest to share their interests without damaging each other.

1. 沈清松(2017)。公共領域中宗教交談的方法論檢討與展望。哲學與文化，44(4)，5-24。
   連結：
2. 沈清松(2013)。五十年來中國哲學的花果飄零與海外華人生命意義構想。漢學研究，31(2)，7-34。
   連結：
3. 沈清松(2004)。論慎到政治哲學中的「公共性」。哲學與文化，31(6)，5-22。
   連結：
4. 沈清松(2010)。休閒與自由：在科技產品與多元他者網絡中的論述。哲學與文化，37(9)，91-104。
   連結：
5. 周曉瑩(2015)。試論沈清松教授的「外推」策略。哲學與文化，42(7)，109-122。
   連結：
6. 林火旺(2005)。審議民主與公民養成。國立臺灣大學哲學論評，29，99-143。
   連結：
7. 魏明德(2004)。公共領域、公共空間與政治版圖。哲學與文化，31(6)，37-49。
   連結：
8. (2013)。環境正義給我的10 堂課。北市:行政院環境保護署。
9. Anscombe, G. E. M.(1958).Modern Moral Philosophy.Philosophy: The Journal of The Royal Institute of Philosophy,XXXIII.(124),1-19.
10. Durie, Ronnie(1996).Mindshift Connection.Saint Paul, MN:Zephyr Press.
11. Galston, William A.(1991).Liberal Purposes.New York, Port Chester:Cambridge University Press.
12. Gardner, Howard(2006).The Development and Education of the Mind: The selected works of Howard Gardner.London:Routledge.
13. Gardner, Howard(2006).Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons.New York:Basic Books.
14. Gardner, Howard(1999).Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for The 21st Century.New York:Basic Books.
15. Gardner, Howard(2011).Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences.New York:Basic Books.
16. Habermas, Jiirgen,Burger, Thomas(trans.)(1991).The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society.Cambridge, Massachusetts:The M IT Press.
17. HARE, Richard Mtrvyn(1999).Objective Prescriptions and Other Essays.Oxford:Clarbndon Press.
18. Kellert, Stephen R.(ed.),Wilson, Edward O.(ed.)(1993).The Biophilia Hypothesis.Washington, D.C.:ISLAND PRESS.
19. Louv, Richard(2008).LAST CHILD IN THE WOODS: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder.Chapel Hill, North Carolina:Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
20. Louv, Richard、郝冰譯、王西敏譯(2009)。失去山林的孩子：拯救「大自然缺失症」兒童。新北:野人文化。
21. Lovelock, James(2000).Gaia: A new look at life on Earth. Reissued, with a new preface and corrections.Oxford:OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS.
22. Low, Setha(ed.),Smith, Neil(ed.)(2006).The Politics of Public Space.New York:Routledge.
23. Marion, Jeffrey L.,Lawhon, Ben,Vagias, Wade M.,Newman, Peter(2011).Revisiting "Beyond Leave No Trace".Ethics, Policy and Environment,14(2),231-237.
24. McPherson, Alan R.(2006)。LNT 運動的伙伴結盟與推廣實務。2006 國家步道環境優化研討會，北市:
25. Moskowitz, David,Ottey, Darcy(2006).Leaving "Leave No Trace" Behind: Towards a Holistic Land Use Ethic.Green Teacher,78,16-19.
26. Roszak, Theodore編、Gomes, Mary E.編、kanner, Allen D.編、荒野保護協會志工譯(2012)。生態心理學：2012心靈轉化版。北市:中華民國荒野保護協會。
27. Simon, Gregory L.,Alagona, Peter S.(2009).Beyond Leave No Trace.Ethics, Place & Environment,12(1),17-34.
28. Simon, Gregory L.,Alagona, Peter S.(2012).Leave No Trace Starts at Home: A Response to Critics and Vision for the Future.Ethics, Policy and Environment,15(1),119-124.
29. Turner, James Morton(2002).From Woodcraft to "Leave No Trace": Wilderness, Consumerism, and Environmentalism in Twentieth-Century America.Environmental History,7(3),462-484.
30. Turner, James Morton(2000).Path of Destruction: The Limits of the "Leave No Trace" Philosophy.E : the Environmental Magazine,11(3),52-53.
31. Wilson, Edward O.(1984).Biophilia.Cambridge, Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.
32. 沈清松(1998)。論公民德行的陶成。哲學與文化，25(5)，406-418。
33. 沈清松(2014)。跨文化哲學論。北京:人民出版社。
34. 沈清松(2014)。「中國哲學的花果飄零─紀念唐君毅先生」鵝湖論壇紀錄（上）。鵝湖月刊，467，29-43。
35. 沈清松(1995)。德行倫理學與儒家倫理思想的現代意義。哲學與文化，22(11)，975-992。
36. 沈清松編(2004)。哲學概論。貴陽:貴州人民出版社。
37. 肖廣嶺(2001)。蓋亞假說─一種新的地球系統觀。自然辯證法通訊，1，87-91。
38. 易芳(2004)。生態心理學。新北:揚智文化。
39. 林火旺(1995)。自由主義社會與公民道德。哲學與文化，22(12)
40. 孫效智(1995)。道德論證問題在基本倫理學上的發展─目的論與義務論之爭。哲學與文化，22(4)，317-331。
41. 秦曉利(2006)。生態心理學。上海:上海教育出版社。
42. 陳永龍(2015)。山域安全與登山自律宣言探討。2015 全國登山研討會論文集，新市:
43. 劉吉川(2006)。LNT 架構下的遊憩衝擊研究。2006 國家步道環境優化研討會，北市:
44. 鄭廷斌(2006)。LNT 臺灣推動經驗之分享─從土地倫理談起。2006 國家步道環境優化研討會，北市: