The Ethics Of Environmental Ethics

Growing up in Switzerland and Oregon, I learned that nature is greatly valued and it is necessary to respect the environment to prevent impending environmental collapse. Living in a society whose morals and ethics include

As global warming intensifies, glaciers melt and forests reduced，more and more people begin to be concerned about environment problem. Environment is the fundamental of our existence，so we need protect environment. Paul H. Rubin in his article “Environmentalism as religion” says “But there is another sense in which environmentalism is becoming more and more like a religion: It provides its adherents with an identity”(399). He thinks environmentalism like a religion, and environmentalism and religion have many same characteristic. I agree Rubin’s opinion. Like religion, environmentalism has difference tribe, environmentalist like a missionary, environmentalism and religion both have food taboos and they also

To keep our environment healthy, all these element need to work together. There are no global laws protecting the environment and that is why everyone should practice good ethics when it comes to the environment. Environmental ethics is the part of environment philosophy which considers extending the traditional boundaries of ethics from only including hum and to non-humans. There are many ethical decisions that human beings make with respect to the environment. Humans are been considered of rational agents because they have clear preference, models uncertainty via expected values, and always to perform the action with the optimal expected outcome of itself. The action of the rational agent performs depends on the

While environmental questions are frequently channeled through practical and economic prisms, it is also appropriate to consider our econolgy as a function of morality. The ethical dilemmas which contribute to our policies and our behaviors regarding the use of fossil fuels and our attention to global climate change are frequently overshadowed by more immediate concerns of survival or mere comfort.

In the introduction of Andrew Light and Holmes Rolston’s book , Environmental Ethics: An Anthology, the authors explain the basic concepts of ethics: more specifically environmental ethics, and how they apply to everyday life. The main concepts discussed include moral agents, moral patients, anthropocentrism, weak or broad anthropocentrism, indirectly morally considerable, and directly morally considerable. These concepts are the foundations to the environmental ethics that Light and Rolston wrote about; however, in regards to the short story written by J. Lanham titled: “Hope and Feathers: A crisis in birder identification,” the two terms most predominately relating to the text are moral patients and moral agents. Lanham, in this text, describes the epitome of what it means to be a good moral agent, as interpreted by Light and Rolston, where others failed.

What exactly is land ethics? According to Leopold, “Land ethics expands the boundaries of ethics by including soils, waters, plants, and animals,” (Leopold, page 239). However, a land ethic cannot prevent the alteration, management, and the use of the resources stated above. Basically, Leopold states that land ethics change the role that we humans play from that of a land-conqueror to that of a citizen and member. In class, we learned that land ethics imply respect for the surrounding community. We as humans are important, and thus, have more responsibility to protect the environment.

"Save the Planet," "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle," "Go Green." Quotes like these have become a commonality in today's age. We all are familiar with the large efforts to help preserve the environment. In "Ideals of Human Excellence and Preserving Natural Environments," Thomas E. Hill Jr. sums up his essay by stating, "The point is not to insinuate that all anti-environmentalists are defective, but to see that those who value such traits as humility, gratitude, and sensitivity to others have reason to promote the love of nature" (688; par. 4) This excerpt provides the thesis behind Hill's argument. The author found that

in the vision of Christian Ethics (Harrison) with teleological and deontological explains that equality can only be done when having one puts in place another which is impossible to do. Cultural Remix - can unite people where they are considering not only individually, but also as a community through all aspects which gives influence and believes that all persons are equal to assume responsibility. Pragmitism- prophetic vision is to human action now with a projection into the future. Not only is the environment what matters, but all things globally, because ecology and social effect on each other, should unite us. It is worrying for everyone, no matter what faith or lack of success, is assuming a responsibility. Some of the solutions that may arise are published as specific policy initiatives and reforms for the environment. Ensure habitat protection, promoting agreements, increasing regulations and achieve further restrictions as regards the ecological

1. Name/Describe one value that environmentalists would express about the environment. What is one group/person/organization that has expressed this value?

An environmentalist is a person worships the environment and cares for nature more than people. Christians and others share the common perception that environmental ethics exist for how human beings should relate to the land, the free market perceptive and the environmental perceptive. Humans share a relationship with all creations of the earth. But as humans, they find themselves as having a role in the created order which is they have a closer relationship with the creator who has charged them with acting responsible within his creation. Even allowing a common complaint of environmental activists is that Stewardship means that the earth was made exclusively because of human beings - that having dominion upper nature is the same as

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

All of the three approaches to environmental ethics use Kant's principle to various extents. The differences between them lie in their individual definitions of moral categories. It's like looking at the same slide under three different powers on a microscope. Each approach relies on Kant's principle to protect the interest of that which they deem worthy.

Living in a highly industrialized world that is ruled by capitalism, the concern for the environment often takes a back seat. Individuals or companies nowadays prioritize achieving optimal profit without putting into mind what their respective actions or productions may have an effect on the environment. They do not realize how important the role of our environment plays in the quality of human life. We can say that a good environment leads to a better quality life, while a bad environment could lead to a harmful and unproductive life. Now, it becomes unfair and unjust when the risks and costs of a company affect a certain group of people and on the opposite side of the spectrum another group of individuals enjoy the benefits without costs. The individuals that are affected badly are usually from Third World Countries where the distribution of risk and costs are not even (Low and Gleeson 1999). This is where Environmental Justice comes in. Environmental Justice mainly concerns the welfare of human beings (Low and Gleeson 1999). Talking about cities where capitalism surges from, it has been argued that these cities are ‘unfairly structured’ (Low and Gleeson 1999). Basically, what this is saying is that the wealthier you are, the better or cleaner the environment. On the other hand, if you are poor, then the environment around you will have more health risks. This kind of injustice or disparity is what adds fuel to the fire of environmental justice. In

DesJardins, J. R. (2013). Environmental ethics: An introduction to environmental philosophy (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

These perspectives are anthropocentric or human centered and view all non-human life as less important than humans themselves. Environmental ethics challenges these beliefs by questioning the assumed moral superiority of human beings to members of other species on earth (SEP, 2008). Preservation of the environment is essential to the preservation of the human race.