An ontology of climate change integral pluralism and the enactment of multiple objects

Journal of Integral Theory and Practice

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 143-174

  Esbjörn Hargens, Sean ^a  

^a JOHN F KENNEDY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Enactment; Integral Theory; Methodology; Multiple objects; Ontological pluralism

Indexed keywords

EID: 79953672043     PISSN: 19445083     EISSN: 19445091     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Abend, G. (2008). The meaning of theory. Sociological Theory, 26(2), 173-199.
2. Allenby, B. (2005a). The pluralistic ontologies of biodiversity (March 31). Retreived May 8, 2009 from http://www.greenbiz.com/.
3. Allenby, B. (2005b). The implications of ontological plurality (April 31). Retreived May 8, 2009, from http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/.
4. Allenby, B. (2005c). All that is solid melts into air (May 31). Retrieved May 8, 2009, from http://www. greenbiz.com/.
5. Benton, T. (1996). Natural relations: Ecology, animal rights, and social justice. London: Verso.
6. Bhaskar, R. (1978). A realist theory of science. London: Verso.
7. Bhaskar, R. (2002a). Reflections on meta-reality: Transcendence, emancipation and everyday life. London: Sage.
8. Bhaskar, R. (2002b). Meta-reality: Creativity, love and freedom. London: Sage.
9. Bhaskar, R., Frank, C., Hoyer, K. G., Naess, P., & Parker, J. (2010). Interdisciplinarity and climate change: Transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. London: Routledge.
10. Capra, F. (1996). The web of life. London: HarperCollins.
11. Carolan, M. S. (2004). Ontological politics: Mapping a complex environmental problem. Environmental Values, 13, 497-522.
12. Carolan, M. S. (2005a). Society, biology, and ecology: Bringing nature back into sociology's disciplinary narrative through critical realism. Organization and Environment, 18, 393-421.
13. Carolan, M. S. (2005b). Realism without reductionism: Toward an ecologically embedded sociology. Human Ecology Review, 12, 1-20.
14. Carolan, M. S. (2006a). Scientific knowledge and environmental policy: Why science needs values. Environmental Sciences, 3, 229-237.
15. Carolan, M. S. (2006b). The values and vulnerabilities of metaphors within the environmental sciences. Society and Natural Resources, 19, 921-930.
16. Carolan, M. S. (2006c). Sustainable agriculture, science, and the co-production of 'expert' knowledge: The value of interactional expertise. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 11, 421-431.
17. Carolan, M. S. (2006d). Conserving nature, but to what end? A look at conservation policies. Organization and Environment, 19, 153-170.
18. Carolan, M. S. (2006e). Do you see what I see? Examining the epistemic barriers to sustainable agriculture. Rural Sociology, 71, 232-260.
19. Carolan, M. S. (2006f). Science, expertise, and the democratization of the decision-making process. Society and Natural Resources, 19, 661-668.
20. Carolan, M. S. (2006g). Social change and the adoption and adaptation of knowledge claims: Whose truth do you trust in regard to sustainable agriculture? Agriculture and Human Values, 23, 270-285.
21. Carolan, M. S. (2007). Mapping biotechnology: From epistemic artifacts to geographies of control. Nature and Culture, 2, 115-138.
22. Carolan, M. S. (2008a). Is it a distinct subspecies? Preble's mouse and the 'best available science' mandate of the endangered species act. Society and Natural Resources, 21(10), 944-951.
23. Carolan, M. S. (2008b). The more-than-representational knowledge/s of countryside: How we think as bodies. Sociologia Ruralis, 48(4), 408-422.
24. Carolan, M. S. (2008c). The bright and blindspots of science: Why objective science is not enough to resolve environmental controversies. Critical Sociology, 34(4), 725-740.
25. Carolan, M. S. (2008d). The multidimensionality of environmental problems: The GMO controversy and the limits of scientific materialism. Environmental Values, 17, 67-82.
26. Carolan, M. S. (2008e). An ecological politics of everyday life: placing flesh on Whitehead's process philosophy. Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology, 12, 51-73.
27. Chalmers, D. J., Manley, D., & Wasserman, R. (2009). Metametaphysics: New essays on the foundations of ontology. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. Cruickshank, J. (Ed.) (2003). Critical realism: The difference it makes. New York: Routledge.
29. Dongping, F. (2010). The tension between holism and pluralism: Comment on 'creative holism.' Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 27, 200-207.
30. Drake, D. (1926). What is a mind? Ontological pluralism versus ontological monism. Mind, 35(138), 230-236.
31. Eddy, B. (2008). AQAL topology: An introduction to integral geography and spatiality. Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, 3(1), 184-198.
32. Edwards, M. G. (2010). Organisational transformation for sustainability: An integral metatheory. New York, NY: Routledge
33. Edwards, P. N. (2010). A vast machine: Computer models, climate data, and the politics of global warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34. Eklund, M. (2009). Carnap and ontological pluralism. In D. J. Chalmers, D. Manley, & R. Wasserman (Eds.), Metametaphysics: New essays on the foundations of ontology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
35. Esbjörn-Hargens, S., & Zimmerman. M. E. (2009). Integral ecology: Uniting multiple perspectives on the natural world. New York: Integral Books.
36. Farias, I., & Bender, T. (Eds). (2010). Urban assemblages: How actor-network theory changes urban studies. New York, NY: Routledge.
37. Fettes, M. (1999). Critical realism and ecological psychology: Foundations for a naturalist theory of language acquisition. Paper presented at the Ecology of Language Acquisition Workshop, University of Amsterdam, January 11-15.
38. Forsyth, T. (1998). Mountain myths revisited: Integrating natural and social environmental science. Mountain Research and Development, 18(2), 107-116.
39. Forsyth, T. (2001). Critical realism and political ecology. In A. Stainer & G. Lopez (Eds.), After postmodernism: An introduction to critical realism. London: Athlone Press.
40. Forsyth, T. (2003). Critical political ecology. New York, NY: Routledge.
41. Giddens, A. (1987). Social theory and modern sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
42. Grove, K. (2009). Rethinking the nature of urban environmental politics: Security, subjectivity, and the non-human. Geoforum, 40, 207-216.
43. Harman, G. (2009) Prince of networks: Bruno Latour and metaphysics. Melbourne, Australia: re. press.
44. Hayles, N. K. (1995). Searching for common ground. In M. Soule & G. Lease (Eds.), Reinventing nature? Responses to postmodern deconstruction. Washington, DC: Island Press.
45. Hey, J. (2006). On the failure of the modern species concept. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 21(8), 447-450.
46. Hoyer, K. G., & Naess, P. (2008). Interdisciplinarity, ecology and scientific theory: The case of sustainable urban development. Journal of Critical Realism, 7(2), 5-33.
47. Hulme, M. (In press). Cosmopolitan climates: Hybridity, foresight, and meaning. Theory, Culture and Society.
48. Hulme, M. (2008a). Geographical work at the boundaries of climate change. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 33(1), 5-11.
49. Hulme, M. (2008b). The conquering of climate: discourses of fear and their dissolution. The Geographical Journal, 174(1), 5-16
50. Hulme, M. (2009). Why we disagree about climate change: Understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
51. Hulme, M., Dessai, S., Lorenzoni, I., & Nelson, D. (2009). Unstable climates: Exploring the statistical and social constructions of "normal" climate. Geoforum, 40(2), 197-206.
52. Inglis, J. (2008). Evolving to address global climate change and the scale of public interactions. World Futures, 64, 498-502.
53. Jackson, C. (1997). Women in critical realist environmentalism. Economy and Society, 26(1), 62-80.
54. Jacquette, D. (2002). Ontology. Montreal: McGill Queens University Press.
55. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
56. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. London: Sage.
57. Law, J. (2002). Aircraft stories: Decentering the object in technoscience. Durham: Duke University Press.
58. Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. London: Routledge.
59. Law, J., & Mol, A. (Eds). (2002). Complexities: Social studies of knowledge practices. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
60. Law, J. & Urry, J. (2003). Enacting the social. Retrieved July 10, 2009, from http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/papers/law-urry-the-social.pdf.
61. Lopez, J., & Potter, G. (Eds.) (2005). After postmodernism: An introduction to critical realism. New York, NY: Continuum Press.
62. Lorenzoni, I., & Hulme, M. (2009) Believing is seeing: laypeople's views of future socio-economic and climate change through scenarios in England. Public Understanding of Science, 18, 383-400.
63. Mayden, R. L. (1997). A hierarchy of species concepts: the denoument in the saga of the species problem. In M. F. Claridge, H. A. Dawah, & M. R. Wilson (Eds.), Species: The units of diversity (pp. 381-423). London: Chapman and Hall.
64. Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham: Duke University Press.
65. Möller, K. (2007). Marketing research traditions: Toward theoretical unification or pluralism? Australasian Marketing Journal, 15(1), 61.
66. O'Neill, S. J., Hulme, M., Turnpenny, J., & Screen, J. A. (In press). Disciplines, geography and gender in framing climate change. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.
67. Oelofse, C. (2003). A critical realist perspective on urban environmental risk: A case study of an informal settlement in South Africa. Local Environment, 8(3), 261-275.
68. Peirce, C. S. (1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (1931-1935). C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
69. Purvis, A., Jones, K. E., & Mace, G. M. (2000). Extinction. BioEssays, 22, 1123-1133.
70. Rasch, W., & Wolfe, C. (Eds.). (2000). Observing complexity: Systems theory and postmodernity. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
71. Soule, M., & Lease, G. (Eds.). 1995. Reinventing nature? Responses to postmodern deconstruction. Washington, DC: Island Press.
72. Spinuzzi, C. (2003). More than one, less than many: A review of three "post-ANT" books. Currents in Electronic Literacy, 7. Retrieved July 3, 2009, from http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/.
73. Stamos, D. N. (2004). The species problem, biological species, ontology, and the metaphysics of biology. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
74. Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
75. Tuana, N. (1993). With many voices: Feminism and theoretical pluralism. In P. England (Ed.), Theory on gender: Feminism on theory (pp. 281-299). London: Aldine.
76. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge: MIT Press.
77. Wheeler, Q., & Meier, E. (Eds.). (2000). Species concepts and phylogenetic theory: A debate. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
78. Wilber, K. (2000). Sex, ecology, spirituality (Collected Works, Vol. 6). Boston: Shambhala.
79. Wilber, K. (2006). Integral spirituality: A startling new role for religion in the modern and postmodern world. Boston: Integral Books.
80. Wilkins, J. S. (2009a). Species: A history of the idea. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
81. Wilkins, J. S. (2009b). Defining species: A sourcebook from antiquity to today. New York: Peter Lang.
82. Wolfe, C. (1998). Critical environments: Postmodern theory and the pragmatics of the "outside. " Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
83. Zembylas, M. (2006). Science education as emancipatory: The case of Roy Bhaskar's philosophy of meta-reality. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(5), 665-676.