From a philosophical perspective three relations need to be adjusted after industrialization in the economic development of a society. These relations are between persons, between persons and nature, and between humanity and oneself. This paper will analyze the relation between people and nature. It will attempt to demons-trate the dual character of the change humankind works in nature in the course of modernization. Humans constantly attempt to con-quer nature, but at same time nature takes its revenge. Therefore the study of ethical relations between humans must be extended to the study of the relation between persons and nature. For establishing a modern ecological ethics, there is not much that is of use in Western traditional philosophy, but we can find many relevant and valuable thoughts in Chinese traditional philosophy. It necessary therefore to dig out and study these treasures in order to establish modern ecological ethics against the background of modern science and on the basis of ancient philosophy with a view to creating a bright future for the 21st century.

Since the early days of the modern industrial society progress in science and technology has given to mankind the ability to change and enhance nature at a wondrously rapid rate. The eco-nomic development of human society also has far exceeded ex-pectation. However, along with these achievements the side-effects become more and more serious. Over one hundred years ago, when people were intoxicated with their great achievement in conquering nature, F. Engels, with keen foresight, warned that we should not indulge ourselves in our victories over nature because, for every such victory nature takes its revenge. In the first step anticipated results are achieved, but at second and third step entirely different and unexcepted effects appear, which very often offset the gains: "The forests and prairies of barbaric times have been turned into deserts during this civilized age." In many areas around the world, economic development and industrialization have deteriorated the environment and upset the ecological balance. This not only checks farther economic prosperity, but also threatens our very safety.

The frequent accidents which have polluted the environmental during the second half of the 20th century, reflections by philo-sophers, warnings from scientists, predictions by futurologists, and gatherings of politicians, all have prompted an investigation of the good and bad effects of the new level of the conquest of nature. This has caused a new awakening of concern for environmental protection, and has induced a new effort to protect the natural environment in various parts of the world. The British philosopher, Aldo Leopold, published his work, The Ethics of Earth, in 1949 at Oxford University. He pointed out in the book: "Formerly, we mis-treated the earth because we regarded it as one of our commodities. Only when we understood that earth is a kind of community we belong to did we begin to respect and take good care of it." He appealed for early attention to environmental protection of the harmony between man and earth, for to regret what has been lost is useless. This work can be ranked as one of classics of Western environmental ethics and Leopold is regarded as the founding father of ecology and environmental protection in the West.

The French philosopher and 1952 Nobel Peace Price winner, Albert Schweizer, in summarizing the lesson of the ecological crisis, suggested a study of the moral criterion for human action upon nature. He believed an ethical theory to be imperfect if it did not include such a norm. Because he was one of the first persons to extend the study of moral behavior from the field of humans to the interaction between people and nature he has been known widely as another of the founding fathers of ecological or environmental ethics.

In the 50’s, after world war II, Eastern and Western nations were busy with economic reconstruction. Great attention was given to this, especially to industrial expansion so that the environmental pollution began to appear. In 1962, an American woman, Carson in Silent Spring described vividly the miserable situation of nature due to ecological damage and environmental pollution. Birds sing no more, and rivers have lost their former vitality. "We are now standing at a cross-road." One road, though easy, leads to disaster; the other, looking strange, the title page, the famous words of Albert Schweizer are cited: "Man has lost his capability both to predict the future and to prevent possible accidents." He will put an end to himself in the course of destroying the earth. This book was still being highly praised after 25 years, when a new edition was issues.

Since the 70’s more scientists, economists and entrepreneurs began to discuss the difficult situation of the present and future, including environmental pollution and the ecological crisis. In 1968, an international symposium attended by 30 specialists from 10 countries of Asia and the West was held at the Italian Academy to discuss the present environmental situation. This was the first international symposium on the ecological crisis. Owing to this symposium, an international non-official academic organization called the Club of Rome was instituted and joined by some 100 scholars from over 40 countries. They produced more than 40 special reports, of which the most famous is The Limits of Growth written by 17 scientists. The report’s most famous conclusion is that only by adhering to a zero-growth policy (that is, to stop the increase of population and of the economy) can a global balance be maintained and the present crisis survived. Of course, the report was attacked by some, but many have taken the same viewpoint. For instance, the research thesis "Global 2000 A.D." comes to the conclusion that if the environment changes at the present rate until the 21st century, the world will be more crowded, pollution more serious and the ecology more unstable and susceptible to damage. Another report is There is already a Globe which was to provide background material for the U.N. conference on the human en-vironment of 1972. It was completed with the help of 152 spe-cialists from 58 countries with the subtitle: The Care and Main-tenance of a Small Planet. With a broad vision the report reveals the cause of environmental pollution and the impairment the global ecological system, namely, the biological circle we inherit and the technological circle we create have lost their balance and are in a latent state of acute conflict. We are facing an historical turning point which requires us to take good care of the earth on which we survive, to take responsibility for protecting the human environ-ment and to learn prudently to administer our globe.

In the 80’s our attention turned from local environmental contamination to global environmental damage, such as the green-house effect and damage to the ozone layer. Whether in developed or in developing countries, both people and their governments were involved in a broad discussion about saving the earth and mankind so that a new upsurge of environmental protection was initiated. Some argue that 1988 was the year of environmental protection. In that year, Gorbachev delivered a speech at the U.N. in which he mentioned the problem of environmental protection more than 20 times. George Bush claimed to be a environmentalist in his cam-paign for president. Mrs. Thatcher called for environmental pro-tection in response to domestic political opponents stating that environmental protection was a great and urgent challenge to humankind. She noted that a healthy economy and a healthy environment depended on each other and that it was worth while to invest a huge amount of money in environmental protection. In that year, even Time magazine broke its rule in selecting as its man of the year not an international celebrity but the injured globe in order to arouse the sense of the need to protect our globe. In the June of 1992, The U.N. Symposium on the Environment and Development was held in Rio de Jeneiro as an international summit for saving the earth. The presidents of various states were present, and several accords on environmental protection were signed. The conflicts between humans and nature has become a worldwide focus and people are searching for ways to solve this crisis.

The issue of environment and ecology has then become a world wide problem drawing the attention of scholars in various fields as well as government officials. In order to save resources, protect the environment and improve the ecology, we should not only ameliorate productive modes and living behavior in dealing with the environment, but also transform the basic principles of our behavior. The sciences have made their own contribution to solving these problems from their special angles. In philosophy the problems of environment and ecology have challenged traditional ethics. Mankind needs to establish a new type of environmental and ecological ethics in order to renew ideas for protecting environ-ment, improving the ecology and creating a new environmental and ecological ethics which will integrate the ethical ideas regarding humans and nature in Western and Chinese philosophies.

In the West, the initiation and study of environmental and ecological ethics began earlier than in China, but in Western traditional philosophy there is very little that is useful to contem-porary environmental protection. Though the study of environmental ethics in China has just begun, there are many resources in Chinese traditional philosophy for dealing with the present envi-ronmental problem.

Western traditional philosophy as dualistic insists on the antagonisms between humans and nature, and between subjective cognition and the objective world. This kind of philosophy is fa-vorable to the development of modern science and makes it easy for people to regard the objective world, nature and all things as objects to be understood and changed. On the other hand, the dualist tradition put too much emphasis on the antagonism and segregation of humans and nature, making the relation into one in which man attempts to overpower or subjugate nature. Ecological ethics, in contrast, wants to build congenial and harmonious rela-tions between man and nature, turning the relation of subordination into one of partnership. Chinese traditional philosophy upholds a unity of humans and nature, attaching much importance to the harmony between the two.

In criticizing traditional philosophy Western scholars have suggested some primary ethical principles for the present. Aldous Huxley has even pointed out that modern humankind no longer views itself as a divinity able to do whatever it desires, as does a conqueror or tyrant. He also thought that if traditional ethics on the relation between humans and nature is to be talked about we need to return to Taoist School of ancient China.

What is the content of the basic theory of environmental ethics proposed by Western scholars?

1. Leopold suggests that the position of human beings in nature be rethought. Humans are not conquerors or rulers over nature, nor masters of nature, but only members of the large family of nature. No creature in nature is a slave of man or born for man, but all are equal members in this family. It is not sufficient to consider only the interests of humankind and take no care of ecological equilibrium; rather a new and more balanced ethics must be built. The right or wrong of human behavior should be evaluated against the broader background of nature, not the limited back-ground of humanity; that is to say, the ideas of good and evil should be extended to the scope of nature. Any behavior favorable to keeping the integrity and stability of flora and fauna is right and good, otherwise it is wrong and evil. The idea of right should be extended as well from mankind to all entities in nature: all plants and animals have the right to breed and survive.

2. Schweizer suggests that ethics should have as a moral standard both man and nature, without this elementary ethical principle no adequate ethics can be formed. In summing up the lessons from the ecological crisis, he put forward the opinion that all life is the great creation of nature and should be respected with great care. It is arbitrary to divide life into high and low values, because up to now we know very well about the effects of various kinds of organisms in the life cycle. The idea of good should be expanded: any behavior caring for, protecting and developing life is good. The relation between man and nature should be a close and mutually appreciative as with an organism.

3. Kenneth E. Goodpaster in his work, From Egoism to En-vironmentalism, holds that the environmental problem is a huge crisis for the 21st century. He emphasizes that humankind must change its attitude from egoism and chauvinism towards nature.

4. In 1986, Prof. Paul Taylor of Princeton University pub-lished his work, Respect for Nature, with the subtitle A Theory of Environmental Ethics, in which he put forward a number of basic principles: the natural world as an interdependent system in which humans are members of the earth’s life community. As every living entity as unique and cannot be replaced, therefore we must respect nature, respect life.

5. In 1988 Thomas Berry published The Dream of Earth which holds that humans and nature should co-exist in harmony so as to evolve peacefully on the earth a community for both. This is the promising way to future, as well as a dream of the earth. At the same year, Temple University published Holmston’s (?) master-piece, Environments Ethics, with a similar viewpoints.

To sum up, the main points are as follows:

1. Human, Earth and Nature make up an organic system of interdependence, or one world or commonwealth. Mankind is a member of the earth’s life of community, expressed as a global village. According to an old Chinese saying, the members of a community should cross a river in the same boat, meaning that people in the same community should help each other.

2. Man and nature should constitute a partnership in which each depends on the other, helps each other, not a relation of con-queror and conquered or master and slave.

3. Natural things do not exist for man, but have their own internal objective. Humans must not substitute their own objectives for those of nature, but must respect nature, respect life.

4. It is necessary to overcome the idea of human egoism and to advocate that everything on earth is equal and in harmony. As Copernicus’ astronomy disclosed that the earth is not the centre of the solar system, the contemporary ecological ethics tells us that humanity is not the center of the earth.

In Chinese traditional philosophy there are a great many similarities to the main standpoint of modern ecological ethics. Ancient Chinese philosophy sees a unity of humans and nature, assuming that nature, humans and all things on earth are accessible to each other and hence unified. Thus the Confucian School claims that the man who knows nature is qualified as a Confucian disciple. The humanism of Confucianism did not reject nature; but sought a supreme state of unity of man and nature. believes that four things on earth are great: natural law, heaven, earth and humankind. The theory asserts that humanity is as great as nature, and that the two are interdependent.

Ancient Chinese philosophy holds that the whole of nature is infused with vitality: "Dao is present everywhere. Everywhere on earth, be it large or small, whether alike or lifeless, has a reason for existence. Therefore we should respect to life and nature and everything on earth should be treated equally.

The view that everything on earth contains is affirmed even more clearly and thoroughly in Buddhist doctrines. There is an old Chinese saying: The stone nods. According to Buddhism, even stones have a soul, and hence can nod. Master Dao Sheng of Dao Sheng Buddhism who was well informed on Zhuang’s philosophy had a deep faith on the adage. "Dao is present everywhere." Before Da Ban Yi Ban Yin was translated into Chinese, he had already considered Buddha to be present in everyone’s soul. All creatures are alive; even a stone has life. At that time, to the mind of some of Xiao Cheng’s disciples this view seemed fallacious. But when the translation of Da Ban Yie Ban Yin came out it confirmed that Buddha is present in everything with no exceptions, even of a stone. It is said that Master Dao Sheng travelled widely to disseminate Buddhist doctrine. The story that once he went to Hangzhou to give a sermon, and the stone in the pool bowed to him survives to the present day. Though only folklore, it implies an ethical principles for environmental protection. The stone, if viewed merely as a stone, certainly is lifeless, but in Chinese philosophy the Confucian, Taoist and Buddhist schools all believe that everything is infused with life and is equal so that even a stone had a reason for existence and its proper soul.

Chinese Da Sheng Buddhism holds that everybody and everything has the Buddhist spirit and can turn into Buddha and display its splendid life value in the world. The idea of ecological ethics that everything in nature has equal life value, equal right and equal dignity in nature is very similar to what Chinese Da Cheng Buddhism calls the Buddha soul and spirit. It is claimed in Da Ban Yin Ban Yin that all things have an equal right to survive and evolve. This is similar to the theory of modern ecological ethics which also upholds that everything on earth has the right to exist and develop.

Modern ecology requires us to change nature and protect it. The co-existence of the objectives of nature and humanity requires that we adopt a policy of both changing and protecting the nature.

Humankind cannot use nature’s objective to replace his own, but he be at the mercy of nature. For the same reason, we cannot supplant nature’s objective by that of humanity. We must acknowledge and respect nature’s objective, and protect its eco-logical balance, structure and reproductive capacity. At same time, under certain conditions, we must transform nature, change the course of realizing its objective, and enable the human objective to be realized. From this starting point, we must draw upon the treasures of ancient philosophy and strive vigorously to construct and develop ecological ethics.

situation is unfavorable to women; they suffer sexual discrimination in seeking a job, which hinders the establishment of women’s personalties as subjects.

Second, due to the backwardness of ideas in comparison to the progress of the economy, certain feudal ideas such as "the male has dignity while the female is humble" and "a woman should be subordinate to a man" still fetter women, and influence social expectations regarding their role and value. This gives rise to certain dilemmas for women in seeking their rights and fulfilling their obligations. Many women feel a tension between their role in society and in their family, and in seeking a position in social life while feeling a sense of obligation to be a good wife and mother.

Third, the male culture inclines women to be masculine: as society has long been dominated by men the behavior of successful men in social life is taken as the pattern for all people. As women have not created their own pattern of behavior, they must conform to the pattern of man’s behavior so that their role in social life will more easily be accepted. This stage cannot be surmounted until women fully participate as subjects in society. Although the slogans such as "equality for both sexes" play a great role in freeing women from the fetters of family to become subjects in society, they are harmful to the maintenance of the distinctively female personality. In China, a trend toward the masculinization of women was strong after the 1950s, and reach its height in the 1970s. The "Iron Young Woman" in the 1950s was very similar to the male physique; in the 1970s the dress, even the style of women’s hair, was masculinized. Coming into 1980s, people exclaimed with surprising that "there are no woman in this country"; they began to doubt whether the "strong woman" was perfect in personality. Women refused to be masculinized.

However, people have no answer to the question what is the ideal personality for women? They sink into puzzlement and inertia. Men are afraid of their wives being "strong women", and women themselves fear being "strong women". In order to be thought of as tender, many women do not dare to show their talent, but then they worry about being too feminine; they do not know how to mould their personalities. The solution to the problem requires further development in the economy as well as constant progress in ideology; one is complementary to the other.

The modernized economy is a great revolution over the traditional one and will bring about change in all facets of society. The female personality will be developed and improved in the process of the modernization of society and its ideal will be realized.

First, the productive mode of the modernized economy helps manifest the personality of women as subjects. In modern industry, what determines the production is no longer physical human strength, but the application of a high level of technology, which increases the proportion of mental work. Now in some developed countries, the proportion of mental work versus physical labor approximates 1:1, while the value created by the former far exceeds that created by the latter. Therefore, the application of high level technology will reduce or eliminate the physical inferiority of women in production, and enable women to give play to their superiority in patience, carefulness and nimbleness. This is obviously indicated in developed countries: in the U.K. women have more job opportunities than men.

Second, the operational mode of a modernized economy enables women to choose the job suited to them. The open, dynamic pattern of the economy enables women to find positions of their own in a wider range of social activity. In developed countries, women are exploring molding ideal personalities. They are not the traditional good mothers and wives who sacrifice themselves in a closed family context, nor are they the so-called strong women of industrial times. They develop their own standard and hope to get a valuable job with flexible hours and a good location; they hope to take account of both family and career. Some women give up work and become housewives while bring up their children, but their return to the family is for the purpose of educating their children and giving their children the natural love of a mother so that the children can grow soundly. In the meantime, they engage in further studies to give play to their potentialities or to develop their interests, so that they will be more competitive when they take up a career after their children have grown up. Such exploration is praiseworthy under the conditions of a modernized economy; it advances the civilization of the whole society.

Third, the high educational level of society, the high degree of democracy and the modernization and socialization of house work due to the modernization of the economy will enable women to elevate their quality as human beings, to demonstrate their personality, to strengthen their competitive power in social life, and to realize a sound personality. There will be a day when we need no longer emphasize that the male and the female differ and recognize that there is something common to both sexes. Then the peculiar and varied beauty of the character and personality of the female will demonstrate itself naturally in the world.

Of course, molding the female personality depends not merely on the progress of economy and is not merely a matter for women alone. It depends on the consistent efforts of the whole society; this requires theoretical work by scholars to find the incompatibilities and in time eliminate them.