The Arrogance of Humanism (Galaxy Books) [Paperback]

"The arrogance of humanism" by David Ehrenfeld isn't a stringent philosophical book (which I assumed), but rather a personal statement by the author himself - and perhaps his wife Joan. The book feels meandering and disjointed.

Ehrenfeld writes from an ostensibly Jewish-Christian perspective, and frequently quotes rather unusual sources, such as "Lord of the Rings" or "The Silmarillion". He also has a crush on George Orwell, whom he regards as one of the few humanists who understood the problems of his own philosophy. To the author, "humanism" is essentially a religion, which replaces the belief in God, Nature or the supernatural with belief in Man, or rather the ability of humans to become more or less omnipotent (and, by implication, god-like).

Ehrenfeld believes that *control* is at the basis of the humanist project: control over nature, society and ultimately over humans themselves. In the opinion of the author, such control is impossible. The very complexity of the technological-administrative apparatus exercising the control will make the system break down. The main chapters deal with environmental destruction, which the author (a biology professor) believes is connected to humanism. He is especially critical of the modern conservation movement, which attempts to save animals, plants or wilderness areas with the argument that they are somehow economically valuable. The author believes that nature should be left alone, since it exists for its own sake, rather than for human benefit.

Ehrenfeld is extremely negative even to "clean energy" and other forms of environmental-friendly high tech. The author believes that clean energy will be put to the usual, destructive uses and simply speed up the process of environmental destruction and high-tech madness. Nor is he very optimistic about space colonies: surely such complex systems will sooner or later suffer a break down, killing everybody onboard? And why do we want to move out to outer space, anyway? Because Earth have turned uninhabitable, perhaps...?

Needless to say, Ehrenfeld is pessimistic, bordering on misanthropic, and believes that the best we can hope for (short of a supernatural intervention) is a great depression which destroys most of the global financial and technological systems, throwing humanity back to a time of local self-reliance. Humanism isn't going to mend its ways voluntarily. Ehrenfeld makes a comparison to Frodo in "Lord of the Rings", who couldn't destroy the ring of power. It was inadvertently destroyed by Gollum, who was really under its spell. In the same way, humanism will be broken only by one of its products.

"The arrogance of humanism" isn't the most graceful book around, and you probably heard most of it before, if you are versed in deep ecological literature. The most disturbing aspect of the book is its explicit misanthropy. The supernatural intervention (sic) or world depression craved by the author would lead to a *massive* die-off. Small wonder Ehrenfeld isn't a humanist!

By why is he a biology professor, rather than living in a hut with the Unabomber? This, alas, is never explained...

In a sense, this book is really about the arrogance of David Ehrenfeld.

"The arrogance of humanism" by David Ehrenfeld isn't a stringent philosophical book (which I assumed), but rather a personal statement by the author himself - and perhaps his wife Joan. Nothing wrong with that, but the book feels a bit meandering and disjointed.

Ehrenfeld writes from a Jewish-Christian perspective, and frequently quotes rather unusual sources, such as "Lord of the Rings" or "The Silmarillion". He also has a crush on George Orwell, whom he regards as one of the few humanists who understood the problems of his own philosophy. To the author, "humanism" is essentially a religion, which replaces the belief in God, Nature or the supernatural with belief in Man, or rather the ability of humans to become more or less omnipotent (and, by implication, god-like). Secular readers might have an easier time appreciating the author's argument if "humanism-as-religion" is replaced with "modernism", "the current paradigm" or some such designation.

Ehrenfeld believes that *control* is at the basis of the humanist project: control over nature, society and ultimately over humans themselves. The author believes that such control is impossible, indeed that the very complexity of the technological-administrative apparatus exercising the control will tend to make the system break down. The main chapters deal with environmental destruction, which the author (a biology professor) believes is connected to humanism. He is especially critical of the modern conservation movement, which attempts to save animals, plants or wilderness areas with the argument that they are somehow economically valuable. The author believes that nature should be left alone, since it exists for its own sake, rather than for human benefit.

Ehrenfeld is extremely negative even to "clean energy" and other forms of environmental-friendly high tech. The author believes that "clean" energy will be put to the usual, destructive uses and simply speed up the process of environmental destruction and high-tech madness. Nor is he very optimistic about space colonies: surely such complex systems will sooner or later suffer a break down, killing everybody onboard? And why do we want to move out to outer space, anyway? Because Earth have turned uninhabitable, perhaps...?

Needless to say, Ehrenfeld is pessimistic, bordering on misanthropic, and believes that the best we can hope for (short of a supernatural intervention) is a great depression which destroys most of the global financial and technological systems, throwing humanity back to a time of local self-reliance. Humanism isn't going to mend its ways voluntarily. Ehrenfeld makes a comparison to Frodo in "Lord of the Rings", who couldn't destroy the ring of power. It was inadvertently destroyed by Gollum, who was really under its spell. In the same way, humanism will be broken only by one of its products.

"The arrogance of humanism" isn't the most graceful book around, and you probably heard most of it before, if you are versed in deep ecological literature. However, as a personal statement of David Ehrenfeld's Umwelt, in Houston or otherwise, it may have some interest.

Perhaps I should point out that this review was substantially revised on October 7, 2011 and that the helpful votes refer to the original version. The current version of my review is shorther and more negative towards the Umwelt of Ehrenfeld...