SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Social And Humanities Sciences / 2021 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

A GEOGRAPHICAL PERSPECTIVE TO RELIGIONS’ APPROACH TO NATURE

DİNLERİN DOĞAYA YAKLAŞIMINA COĞRAFİ BİR BAKIŞ AÇISI

Semra AKAY
Pages
145–167
Publication Date
2021-09-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Consequently, it tries to contribute to human geography in general and to geog-raphies of religions, a sub-branch of human geography in particular, by under-standing the impacts of religion on the ongoing discussions of nature in human geography.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article illustrates a geographical perspective through approaching the na-ture/culture relationship from various religions’ worldviews.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Tangible changes in nature such as greenhouse gas emission, acid deposition, deforestation and ozone layer depletion could be immensely felt.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Consequently, it tries to contribute to human geography in general and to geog-raphies of religions, a sub-branch of human geography in particular, by under-standing the impacts of religion on the ongoing discussions of nature in human geography.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Din · Doğa · Kültür-doğa düalizmi

Abstract

This article illustrates a geographical perspective through approaching the na-ture/culture relationship from various religions’ worldviews. Tangible changes in nature such as greenhouse gas emission, acid deposition, deforestation and ozone layer depletion could be immensely felt. Over the past few decades, these issues related to nature have received intense attention, both in academia and non-academic areas. These substantial changes directly result from the dualistic relationship between humans and non-human beings since the Enlightenment period. Therefore, this article proposes why we should consider a religious-based solution for environmental problems through considering different reli-gions’ approaches to nature. It analyses religions in three sub-categories as mon-otheist religions, Eastern religions and indigenous religions and shows how var-ious religions approach the relationship between nature, humans and culture. Consequently, it tries to contribute to human geography in general and to geog-raphies of religions, a sub-branch of human geography in particular, by under-standing the impacts of religion on the ongoing discussions of nature in human geography.

Özet

Bu makale doğa/ kültür ilişkisine çeşitli dinlerin perspektifinden yaklaşarak coğ-rafi bir bakış açısı sunmaktır. Doğadaki sera gazi salınımı, asit birikimi, orman-sızlaştırma, ozan katının incelmesi gibi değişiklikler somut bir şekilde hissedil-mektedir. Bu somut değişimler, Aydınlanma döneminden itibaren insanın insan dışı varlıklarla kurduğu dualistik ilişkinin doğal bir sonucudur. Doğa ile ilgili meseleler son birkaç on yıldır gerek akademide gerekse akademi dışı alanlarda yoğun bir ilgi görmüştür. Bu yüzden bu makale, farklı dinlerin doğa yaklaşımla-rını ele alarak doğa problemlerine din perspektifli bir çözüm önerisi getirilmesi gerektiğini önermektedir. Dinleri monoteist, Doğu dinleri ve yerli dinler olarak üç kategoride analiz edip, çeşitli dinlerin doğa, insan ve kültür ilişkisine nasıl yaklaştığını göstermektedir. Özetle bu makale, beşerî coğrafyada var olan doğa tartışmalarına din faktörünün etkisini anlamaya çalışarak genel olarak beşerî coğ-rafyaya özel olarak da beşerî coğrafyanın bir alt dalı olan dinler coğrafyasına katkı sunmaya çalışır.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKAY, S. (2021). A GEOGRAPHICAL PERSPECTIVE TO RELIGIONS’ APPROACH TO NATURE. International Journal of Social And Humanities Sciences, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 145–167. https://ajindex.com/articles/768517

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Adorno, T. W., ve Horkheimer, M. (1997). Dialectic of enlightenment (Vol. 15). Verso. Aḥmad, Ḫuršīd. (1976). Islam: Its meaning and message. Islamic council of Europe. Alley, K. D. (2000). Separate domains: Hinduism, politics, and environ-mental pollution. Hinduism and Ecology: The Intersection of Earth, Sky, and Water, 355–387.
  2. Attfield, R. (2000). Christianity and nature. A Companion to Environmen-tal Philosophy, 96–110.
  3. Braun, B. (2002). The intemperate rainforest: Nature, culture, and power on Canada’s west coast. U of Minnesota Press.
  4. Castree, N. (1995). The nature of produced nature: Materiality and knowledge construction in Marxism. Antipode, 27, 12–12.
  5. Castree, N. (2000). Marxism and the production of nature. Capital & Class, 24(3), 5–36.
  6. Chidester, D. (2018). 1. Animism. In Religion (pp. 23–29). University of California Press.
  7. Demeritt, D. (1994). Ecology, objectivity and critique in writings on na-ture and human societies. Journal of Historical Geography, 20(1), 22–37.
  8. Duncan, J. (2009).
  9. Coffee, Disease, and the “Simultaneity of Stories-So-Far” in the Highlands of 19th-Century Ceylon. Spatialising Politics: Culture and Geography in Postcolonial Sri Lanka, Edited by Cathrine Brun and Tariq Jazeel, 44–71.
  10. Earhart, H. B. (2004). Japanese religion: Unity and diversity. Faulstich, P. (1986). Pictures of the dreaming: Aboriginal rock art of Aus-tralia. Archaeology, 39(4), 18–25.
  11. Ginn, F., ve Demeritt, D. (2009). In Nature: A contested concept. Sage London. Golshani, M. (2000). Islam and the sciences of nature: Some fundamental questions. Islamic Studies, 39(4), 597–611.
  12. Gordon, D. M., ve Krech III, S. (2012). Indigenous knowledge and the environment in Africa and North America. Ohio University Press.
  13. Haraway, D. (2013). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. Routledge. Harvey, D. (1985). The Urbanization of Capital: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  14. Harvey, D. J., Merry, A. H., Royle, L., Campbell, M. P., ve Rudd, P. M. (1996). Justice, nature ve the geography of difference. Hiebert, T. (1996). The Yahwist’s landscape: Nature and religion in early Israel. Oxford University Press.
  15. Hope, M., ve Young, J. (1994). Islam and ecology. CrossCurrents, 180–192.
  16. Hussey, C. (2019). The picturesque: Studies in a point of view. Routledge. Kiple, K. F. (2007). A movable feast: Ten millennia of food globalization. Cambridge University Press.
  17. Latour, B. (2004). Politics of nature. Harvard Uni