The concept that asserts that man is the most significant being in the universe is known by this name. Since it is a combination of the Ancient Greek words “anthropos,” which means “human,” and “kentron,” which means center, when looked at as a word structure, it can also be used to refer to “anthropocentrism” in Turkish. Ancient Greek philosophers are the originators of the anthropocentrism perspective. An anthropocentric viewpoint is exemplified by Aristotle’s assertion in his book Politics that “everything in nature exists for human beings, the value of things other than humans is only as much as the benefit they provide to humans.” Similar to Protogoras, who said that “man is the measure of all things,” this viewpoint is anthropocentric. In the Renaissance era, the anthropocentric perspective persisted. The idea that nature and other living things exist for human benefit and that humans should control nature through the application of science and technology is still prevalent today.
The anthropocentric perspective has an impact on how people interact with other living things in nature. According to anthropocentrism, people are more valuable than other living things. This strategy leads to the conclusion that other living species exist to benefit humans, which can have negative repercussions that could cause other living species in nature to go extinct. Another effect of anthropocentrism is that some actions that would be illegal or unethical if they were performed on humans are acceptable when performed on other living things. The best illustration of this is the practice of testing brand-new medications and treatments on animals first.
In discussions of ethics, and particularly environmental ethics, the anthropocentric perspective is crucial. Many points of view contend that anthropocentrism is the fundamental cause of environmental pollution and the harm done to nature by humans from the standpoint of environmental ethics. On the other hand, proponents of the anthropocentric viewpoint assert that, in terms of the anthropocentric viewpoint, in terms of sustainability, and for the benefit of future human generations, harming natural resources and other living things is incorrect. Therefore, it is asserted that the anthropocentric perspective is not the primary cause of environmental issues.
An approach called anthropocentrism has been proposed to be used as a yardstick in interpreting issues that arise, particularly in the area of ethics, and in deciding what is right and wrong. The anthropocentric approach may in fact have detrimental effects on other living species if it is not viewed from a broad and long-term perspective. However, it is obvious that sensitivity should be paid to environmental issues and the protection of other living species in terms of anthropocentrism when taking sustainability and future human generations into account.