Search

This article explores representations of natural phenomena in the second novel in the James Bond series, Ian Fleming's Live and Let Die (London: Penguin, [1954] 2008). Several critics have noted the enjoyment Fleming derived from his Jamaican home, adjacent to the ocean. His relationship with the ocean and nature, particularly birds, is evident in his writing. Although the novel is firmly in the thriller/spy genre, the many references to natural phenomena provide the reader with points of reflection about humanity and the environment. The article demonstrates that although Fleming wrote in the thriller/spy genre, a significant element of his writing has value in the field of ecocriticism. The article draws on critic Greg Garrard, who refers to those who use nature for their own purposes as the Cornucopians. Other critics whose work informs this reading of Fleming's novel include Arne Naess, a central figure in Deep Ecology, and Rachel Carson, who pioneered our understanding of the human relationship with the oceans. The work of Jacques-Yves Cousteau (whom Fleming knew personally) and Peter Godfrey-Smith is also considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing global warming and the loss of biodiversity should concern us all. Some feel that outdoor activities, which take place in natural surroundings, should have a special obligation to change. In this article I present an example of what an outdoor life practice that responds to the ecological crisis could look like. I use the simple Norwegian outdoor life called friluftsliv, and the deep ecological version suggested by philosopher and climber Arne Næss (1912–2009) as an example and case. Naessian friluftsliv is interesting and relevant in three ways. First, Naess gave a philosophical basis for friluftsliv, building on deep ecology and Spinozism. Second, he presented content, norms and guidelines for a deep ecological friluftsliv. And third, he gave examples of such friluftsliv through his own practice of simple life in nature. Naess thus presents a radical alternative to present-day resource-consuming and specialized outdoor activities and nature sports. Finally, Naess's version of deep ecological friluftsliv is discussed in relation to alternative theoretical approaches and to critical questions concerning friluftsliv as practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Experimental philosophy often draws its data from questionnaire-based surveys of ordinary intuitions. Its proponents are keen to identify antecedents in the work of philosophers who have referred to intuition and everyday understanding [e.g. Knobe, Joshua, and Shaun Nichols, 'An Experimental Philosophy Manifesto'. In Experimental Philosophy, edited by Joshua Knobe and Shaun Nichols, 3-14. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007]. In this context, 'Empirical Semantics', pioneered by Arne Naess early in the twentieth century, offers striking parallels. Naess believed that much contemporary philosophy was unempirical because it made no reference to ordinary understanding or use of language. In response, he attempted large-scale studies of ordinary understanding of philosophically significant terms [e.g. Naess, Arne. 'Truth' as Conceived by Those Who Are Not Professional Philosophers. Oslo: Jacob Dybwad, 1938]. This article will compare Empirical Semantics and experimental philosophy, and assess what such a comparison reveals that might not be apparent from a consideration of either in isolation. It will concentrate on two points of comparison: the wider philosophical ambitions of the two approaches, and the types of criticisms they have encountered. Naess was straightforwardly interested in folk intuitions as philosophical data, whereas many experimental philosophers are also interested in explaining the intuitions themselves. A comparison of the different types of criticism reveals attitudes to philosophical practice which have recurred across a time period of some eighty years, and those which are more specific to historical context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]