Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
environmental problems introduction
what is environmental ethics
Theories on Environmental Ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: environmental problems introduction
The Need for Environmental Ethics “Unless humanity is suicidal, it should want to preserve, at the minimum, the natural life-support systems and processes required to sustain its own existence” (Daily p.365). I agree with scientist Gretchen Daily that drastic action is needed now to prevent environmental disaster. Immediate action and changes in attitude are not only necessary for survival but are also morally required. In this paper, I will approach the topic of environmental ethics from several related sides. I will discuss why the environment is a morally significant concern, how an environmental ethic can be developed, and what actions such an ethic would require to maintain and protect the environment. The most obvious reason that the environment has moral significance is that damage to it affects humans. Supporters of a completely human-centered ethic claim that we should be concerned for the environment only as far as our actions would have a negative effect on other people. Nature has no intrinsic value; it is not good and desirable apart from its interaction with human beings. Destruction and pollution of the environment cannot be wrong unless it results in harm to other humans. This view has its roots in Western tradition, which declares that “human beings are the only morally important members of this world” (Singer p.268). William F. Baxter exemplifies this anthropocentric viewpoint. In his book People or Penguins: The Case of Optimal Pollution, he argues that society should respect and attempt to preserve environmental balance only if the benefits to humans outweigh the costs. Baxter claims that, since there is no normative definition of “pure” air or water, society should aim for a level of pol... ... middle of paper ... ...osystem Services With Efficiency, Fairness, and Sustainability as Goals.” Daily 49-64 * Daily, Gretchen C., ed. Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1997. * ---. “Valuing and Safeguarding Earth’s Life-Support Systems.” Daily 365-373. * Fritsch, Albert J. Environmental Ethics: Choices for Concerned Citizens. Garden City: Anchor Press-Doubleday, 1980. * Myers, John Peterson. “Perspectives on Nature’s Services.” Daily xvii-xviii. * Shirk, Evelyn. “New Dimensions in Ethics: Ethics and the Environment.” Ethics and the Environment. Proc. of Conf. on Ethics and the Environment, April 1985, Long Island University. Ed. Richard E. Hart. Lanham: University Press of America, 1992. 1-10. Singer, Peter. Practical Ethics. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
The long-term aim is to develop an approach to ethics that will help resolve contemporary issues regarding animals and the environment. In their classical formulations and as recently revised by animal and environmental ethicists, mainstream Kantian, utilitarian, and virtue theories have failed adequately to include either animals or the environment, or both. The result has been theoretical fragmentation and intractability, which in turn have contributed, at the practical level, to both public and private indecision, disagreement, and conflict. Immensely important are the practical issues; for instance, at the public level: the biologically unacceptable and perhaps cataclysmic current rate of species extinctions, the development or preservation of the few remaining wilderness areas, the global limitations on the sustainable distribution of the current standard of living in the developed nations, and the nonsustainability and abusiveness of today's technologically intense crop and animal farming. For individuals in their private lives, the choices include, for example: what foods to eat, what clothing to wear, modes of transportation, labor-intensive work and housing, controlling reproduction, and the distribution of basic and luxury goods. What is needed is an ethical approach that will peacefully resolve these and other quandaries, either by producing consensus or by explaining the rational and moral basis for the continuing disagreement.
Kohak, Erazim V. "Part II." The Green Halo: a Bird's-eye View of Ecological Ethics. Chicago,
Onora O’Neill in her text “Environmental values, Anthropocentrism and Speciesism” discusses first different views that give humans an ethic through two utilitarian thinkers (Bentham and Mill), and then in her turn tries to come up with an ethic that protects the animals and the environment by also protecting humans.
Ethics is the study of how people should live. people have different views and beliefs of how they're supposed to live their life. people from all over the world have different ethical beliefs and different ways to determine which beliefs are right and which are wrong. when you visit a different country, you notice things they are doing and those things might seem wrong to you and you would never consider doing what they have just done but in their society its normal and everyone does it. inside the margins of this paper I am going to analyze the top three models used to determine a morally significant being based on the criteria in your book. I will first define a moral agent and a morally significant being then take you through the steps to deciding what a significant being is and which criteria you would use for each.
The environment in America today is far from Eden, but there is a valiant battle being fought by many to return the earth to a more "natural" state. Green and clean is the preferred vision of the future1. This trend towards environmental awareness, or environmentalism, is a prominent theme in today’s American society. Politics, industry, marketing, and media all use the environment as a means to sell themselves. With such a high profile, it seems almost unbelievable that there was a time when the word environment was little known or not used. However, the period was not so long ago. Even before World War II nature was referred to as wilderness and wilderness existed to serve humans2. The shift from nature existing to serve humans to humans protecting the environment was not a very complex project, but rather one of many small influences and their resulting effects. Hence, the rise of environmentalism in American society is the result of gradual social changes, which created a shift in social values.
One pivotal point regarding the debate on environmental ethics and the course humans should take is regarding future generations. How do the actions we take today impact those who inherit this planet after us? Some people argue that we do not inherit this world from our parents, but rather borrow it from our future children. Regarding the text Sustainability and Responsibility to the Future, several different viewpoints are offered regarding both sides of the ethics of environmentalism.
Desjardins, J.R. (2013). Environmental Ethics: An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy. Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Analyzing human obligation pertaining to all that is not man made, apart from humans, we discover an assortment of concerns, some of which have been voiced by philosophers such as Tom Regan, Peter Singer and Aldo Leopold. Environmentally ethical ideals hold a broad spectrum of perspectives that, not only attempt to identify a problem, but also focus on how that problem is addressed through determining what is right and wrong.
The articles “The Environmental issue from hell” by Bill McKibben and “The Obligation to Endure” by Rachel Carson both talk about the environmental consequences that people have caused. However, McKibben writes about Global warming and argues that it is a moral responsibility to preserve the earth, while on the other hand, Carson writes about pollution of the earth caused by man. McKibben article makes good points and supports his claim with facts which makes his article valid. Carson supports her idea with adequate information and factual evidence which also makes her article valid.
The inspiration for environmental ethics was the first Earth Day in 1970 when environmentalists started urging philosophers who were involved with environmental groups to do something about environmental ethics. An intellectual climate had developed in the last few years of the 1960s in large part because of the publication of two papers in Science: Lynn White's "The Historical Roots of our Ecologic Crisis" (March 1967) and Garett Hardin's "The Tragedy of the Commons" (December 1968). Most influential with regard to this kind of thinking, however, was an essay in Aldo Leopold's A Sand County Almanac, "The Land Ethic," in which Leopold explicitly claimed that the roots of the ecological crisis were philosophical. (Although originally published in 1949, Sand County Almanac became widely available in 1970 in a special Sierra Club/Ballantine edition, which included essays from a second book, Round River.
A human induced global ecological crisis is occurring, threatening the stability of this earth and its inhabitants. The best path to address environmental issues both effectively and morally is a dilemma that raises concerns over which political values are needed to stop the deterioration of the natural environment. Climate change; depletion of resources; overpopulation; rising sea levels; pollution; extinction of species is just to mention a few of the damages that are occurring. The variety of environmental issues and who and how they affect people and other species is varied, however the nature of environmental issues has the potential to cause great devastation. The ecological crisis we face has been caused through anthropocentric behavior that is advantageous to humans, but whether or not anthropocentric attitudes can solve environmental issues effectively is up for debate. Ecologism in theory claims that in order for the ecological crisis to be dealt with absolutely, value and equality has to be placed in the natural world as well as for humans. This is contrasting to many of the dominant principles people in the contemporary world hold, which are more suited to the standards of environmentalism and less radical approaches to conserving the earth. I will argue in this essay that whilst ecologism could most effectively tackle environmental problems, the moral code of ecologism has practical and ethical defects that threaten the values and progress of anthropocentricism and liberal democracy.
Anthropocentrism is the school of thought that human beings are the single most significant entity in the universe. As a result, the philosophies of those with this belief reflect the prioritization of human objectives over the well-being of one’s environment. However, this is not to say that anthropocentric views neglect to recognize the importance of preserving the Earth. In fact, it is often in the best interests of humans to make concerted efforts towards sustaining the environment. Even from a purely anthropocentric point of view, there are three main reasons why mankind has a moral duty to protect the natural world.
Two philosophies were developed in the past as part of the early environmental consciousness. Utilitarian conservation states that resources should be used for the greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time. Biocentric preservation, on the other hand, emphasizes the fundamental right of living organisms to exist and to pursue their own goods. Early schools of thought and rising concerns such as fossil fuel issues, air and water pollution and biodiversity loss led to modern environmentalism, the active participation in attempts to solve environmental pollution and resource problems. This term reinforces the notion that human beings have a responsibility to protect the environment. Similarly, global environmentalism is a concern or action to help solve global environmental problems.
We all belong to the same world and all of us have the same responsibilities towards the world and its environment. This fact might be hard to digest, but if we continue to pollute the Earth at the current rate, all of the world’s ocean waters will become one-hundred-thirty percent acidic. This means that the ocean will be unable to sustain most of its marine life and only a few creatures will be able to survive in the water. A big population of people think that they do not or have few responsibilities towards the environment. People think that the governor of a country should take steps to help the environment. They leave it to scientists since they have the technology to prevent pollution, or that is what most people think. There are more responsibilities to the world each individual has than most of realize. The amount of negligence and ignorance of humans towards the Earth is taking a heavy toll.
Environmental philosophers are able to open up a range of different ideas behind our environmental crisis. They do this by not only looking at physical marks left by humans on the earth but also at the very humans themselves. Theories don’t only explain complex dynamics and structures but give us an opportunity to reflect upon our own behaviors and decisions in relation to the environment.