Przejdź do głównej zawartości


The Rights of Nature movement uses a bold tactic to preserve our habitable Earth: it seeks to extend (pseudo) personhood to things like watersheds, forests and other ecosystems, as well as nonhuman species, in hopes of creating legal "standing" to ask the courts for protection:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_of_nature

-

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/15/artificial-lifeforms/#moral-consideration

1/
The famous photo of LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act. LBJ and the onlookers' heads have been replaced with the heads of 1950s pulp magazine robots.
I was once in an educational meeting with local climate activists in a progressive local group of people. This topic came out and one of the activists was very positive about this idea. Almost all of us there were skeptical about it (including me having to think about it as it was the first time I heard of it). This activist despite being a devout christian (religion and culture of the colonizer) also mentioned that this goes to the roots of our slavic culture, as we used to regard parts of nature as living beings (I couldn't find a source). He also explained that even though this idea seems a bit woo it's extremely easy to grasp: since a part of nature is considered a (new type of) person you can sue in it's behalf, which here isn't possible currently. It's kinda like a child being neglected/abused and suing their parents for that. Defending the vulnerable, the ones that cannot defend themself is the basis for it. Since they are already important enough for us to name them why not extend this reasoning further? Here this idea is called "osoba rzeka" ("person river") or in terms of the most important rivers in Poland: "osoba Wisła" and "osoba Odra" (sometimes instead of osoba-person I heard used osobowość-personality/personhood).
Ten wpis został zedytowany (3 dni temu)

Cory Doctorowudostępnił to.

@Kulei
Animal cruelty laws are another precedent for non-human representation.

How do you defend, or even detect, a river's self-determination? Maybe copy from child protection laws where the person is incapable of such?
@Luce

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/2