| This dissertation explores human relationship with the world in light of who we are called to be by God (from a North American, Reformed Christian perspective) and what we know about the conditions of our existence. This inquiry arises out of growing challenges of ecological degradation, and a globalized, diverse social arena.;The response of western, industrialized societies has been to pursue technological fixes rather than to reevaluate lifestyles and human purpose. The world is primarily regarded as a resource to be extracted, and shaped according to our designs---albeit with some conservation. Others claim natural laws must be obeyed, and that humans can do no other than harm natural systems. Both attitudes have rendered some benefits, but they also destroy and distort human purpose, dignity, and relationships.;Christian religious responses generally support human domination over nature, with varying degrees of respect for non-human communities of life, ranging from "dominion" at one end of the spectrum, to "stewardship" at the other. Although they share a conviction that they are trying to achieve God's will, they tend towards anthropocentrism in the way they characterize human relationship with the world. Other religious responses tend to advance a "participant" role for humans that ranges from respectful action to hands-off obedience to natural laws.;Core values and differing worldviews, evidenced in spoken statements made in public policy arenas, reveal symbols that carry the weight of religious conviction, regardless of whether or not they are explicit.;This dissertation analyzes one arena of public controversy: planning for the management of Yosemite National Park in California. It examines core worldviews with the aid of symbol and value analysis, and a symbol of responsibility derived primarily from theologian H. Richard Niebuhr. This dissertation demonstrates how such analysis enlarges understanding what is really going on It finds that the human role in nature is a core underlying theme in the Yosemite case study. It demonstrates how the symbol of responsibility gets beyond polar extremes, both as an analytical tool, and in processes and commitments. It concludes that the symbol of responsibility holds promise for ecumenical, interfaith, and secular-religious dialogue. |
