Human ecology: The subversive, conservative science

2Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Paul Sears identified ecology as a subversive science; William Ophuls, referring primarily to its human applications, called it a conservative science. Both characterizations are correct. Human ecologists aim to conserve natural resources, thereby making it possible for our posterity to enjoy a quality of life at least equal to ours. Frequently this kind of conservatism is at odds with the conservation of traditional religious beliefs, political practices, and social privileges: hence the aptness of the adjective "subversive." The essence of human ecology is found in a few propositions of the sort that mathematician E. T. Whittaker called "postulates of impotence." These lead to simplebut profound generalizations, of which a dozen are offered here. © 1985 by the American Society of Zoologists.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hardin, G. (1985). Human ecology: The subversive, conservative science. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 25(2), 469–476. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/25.2.469

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free