Approaches to Environmental Ethics

The Emergence of Environmental Ethics

 Early 70’s environmental ethics emerged as a sub-discipline of
environmental philosophy
 A discipline of philosophy that studies the relationship of human
beings to, and also the value and moral status of, the
environment and its non-human contents
 Includes the process of attributing moral consideration not only
to human beings, but also to non-humans as well, ie. Plants and
animals, holistic ecosystem or communities
 Also traces the relationship between human beings to the
environments including its non-human contents in the moral
realm where their value or moral status is considered.
The Emergence of Environmental Ethics
Aldo Leopold, American conservationist and forester (A San
Country Almanac, 1949), explained the importance of
adopting “land ethic”, stressing the importance of land as an
entity that deserves due respect and love. Thus and action is:
 right, and therefore moral, when it has the tendency to
preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic
community
 Wrong when it does the opposite
Leopold’s concept of “land ethic” lacks the rigors of coherent
philosophical framework which gave rise to:
 The emergence of environmental philosophy and its ethics
as put forward by theoreticians and environmental
philosophers in the early 70’s
 The Emergence of
Environmental Ethics
Bryan Norton (Environmental Problems and Future
Generations) sees the analysis of environmental problems as
belonging to three generations:
 1st generation deals with widely using resources along with
the protection of natural monuments or protected areas
 2nd generation deals with the destruction of natural
environments and pollution, e.g. excessive land
development
 3rd generation deals with the possibility of cataclysm (large
scale and violent event in the natural world) or catastrophes
brought about by ozone depletion, acid rain, and the green
house effect. (with significant impact on future generations)
The Emergence of Environmental Ethics
A basic question considered by environmental
ethicist: What are those entities that should be
given moral consideration or value?
 The answer to this question defines the kind of
environmental approach their theoretical
framework assumes together with their suggestions
as to what is the right thing to do
Attribution of Moral Consideration (Intrinsic
Value) and their Corresponding Approaches
 Entities that should be attributed moral values:
 Human, non human including higher forms of animals
 All living organisms to include plants
 Holistic entities or communities like ecosystems
 Intrinsic Value vs. Instrumental Value
 Intrinsic value: something has inherent value in itself; worth pursuing in
itself because it is valuable or good for its own sake (e.g. preservation of
life – pursuit of life is an end in itself)
 Instrumental Value: a means toward achieving a certain end (e.g. money as
means of achieving a particular purpose like buying a car, a new cellphone,
etc.
 Moral consideration not exclusively confined to living being since
ecosystems are communities where living organisms could flourish
Humans - Anthropocentrism
 Traditional anthropocentrism: human beings, the center of moral
consideration
 Could be traced from the Judeo-Christian tradition: human beings
were given “dominion over the fish of the sea, birds of the air, and
every living thing that moves upon the earth” (Genesis 1:26-29)
o Earth and natural resources : instrument for man to explore and
conquer, and to make use of, for the benefit of man
 Man’s superiority traced back to Plato and Aristotle who gave
importance to the unique capacity of man as a rational being
 Protagoras, a sophist, also claimed that man is the measure of all
things.
o Rationality: the key to being moral, thus, the recognition that only
human beings are moral due to his special ability towards self-
consciousness and deliberation
 Humans - Anthropocentrism
 Barbara Mckinnon: (Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues, 1995):
human centered anthropocentric perspective has to support broad
environmentalism to be viable
 Our own good requires due and wise regard for animals and the
environment
 This good need not be defined narrowly in terms of the satisfaction of
individual human interests of a limited source, including:
o aesthetic and health interests.
o good dose of altruism or concern for others and for future generations
 Enlightened or prudential anthropocentrism: recognizes duties towards
the environment which emanate from duties to human inhabitants
 Could pave the way for more environmentally conscientious protection
and preservation of the environment coinciding with the virtues of
prudence, altruism, and responsibility towards the environment
 Humans - Anthropocentrism
 Reformist anthropocentric environmental philosophy: weak version
of anthropocentrism:
 Humans as mere stewards responsible for the balance of beauty in
nature, instead of dominion over nature.
 Root causes of environmental crises stem from man’s ignorance,
shortsightedness, and greed which could be addressed by:
o Emphasizing our moral obligation to future generations
o Promoting prudential and frugal use and equitable allocation of
natural resources
o Promoting stewardship of nature
o Enacting and enforcing new legislation
o Adopting new policies and tax measures for the conservation and
preservation of the environment
 Humans - Anthropocentrism
Radical ecologists: introduce structural and
attitudinal changes to society and its institutions as
unrealistic, impractical, and naïve.
Reformist anthropocentrism continues the more
popular and accepted philosophical view on the
environment and is one of the three broad areas in
environmental philosophy.
 Non-humans (Higher Forms of
Animals) - Panthocentrism
 Peter Singer, Australian philosopher (Animal Liberation)
 The realm of being morally considerable must be extended to higher forms of animals
or intelligent animals like dogs and chimpanzees who are sentient and thus have the
capacity to feel pain and suffering
 Against speciesism (interpreted as exclusively for the benefit of the species Homo
sapiens) since animals being members of a different species tend to be treated badly
and without regard for their pain
 Giving preference to the life of a being based on being a member of the same species
is the same as giving preference to those members of the same race (racism)
 Reasons why animals should have moral consideration:
1. Animals are sentient beings and they could feel pain: in pain and suffering, animals
are our equals
o Animals should be freed from harm and infliction of pain: human beings should not
cause sentient animals to suffer (gist of Singer’s Animal Liberation )
 Forms of Animals) -
Panthocentrism
2. Animals are morally considerable because they possess inherent
or intrinsic value
 Considered as end in themselves; should not be considered as
means to man’s usually selfish ends.
 Tom Regan, proponent of animal rights (The Case for Animal
Rights): animal rights should be accorded to higher forms of
animals especially mammals
o Our duty not to cause pain and suffering to higher forms of
animals which comes from their inherent or intrinsic value
Other living organisms are also covered by intrinsic value in
environmental ethics, i.e. plants, and communities or ecosystems
 Living organisms -
Biocentrism
 Biocentrism: not only humans and animals, but also plants should be
morally considerable: a life-centered theory
 Due consideration to the preservation of biodiversity with its plants
and animals
 Environmental protection for all living organisms including animal
rights
 Paul Taylor (The Ethics of Respect for Nature): all living things should
be considered as “teleological centers of life”, that is, every living
organism has its own telos or goal or purpose to fulfill in this world
 An organism should be allowed to reach a state of maturity for it to
fulfill its reproduction: any interference to this is harming the
organism.
 Living organisms -
Biocentrism
Kenneth Goodpaster (On Being Morally
Considerable): being sentient is just a means of
attaining a living organism’s goal (being alive or
having life)
 Not about the criterion of being sentient for
something to be morally considerable, but by the
mere possession of life with goal or function, they
have a purpose to fulfill in this world.
 Every living organism should be morally
considerable
 Holistic Entities or Communities
(Land Ethic) - Ecocentrism
 Ecosystem-centered ethic (ecocentrism): ecosystems as holistic entities that
should be given moral consideration; a holistic regard for the biotic
community or ecological systems.
 A thing is right when it preserves the integrity, stability, and beauty of the
biotic community: it is wrong when it does otherwise.
 Ecosystem has its own integrity, e.g. ecosystem in a river sandbar with unity
of its different elements interdependently co-existing and subsisting with
each other
 J. Baird Callicot and Holmes Rolston III strengthened and galvanized Leopold’s
ideas into a consistently expounded environmental ethical framework
 Callicott (The Conceptual Foundations of Land Ethic): land ethic morality is
the next step of man’s evolutionary ethical development.
 Holistic Entities or
Communities (Land Ethic)
- Ecocentrism
 Homo sapiens as a plain member and citizen of the biotic community: it is the
preservation of the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community that
matters
 A species is what it is because it has adapted to a niche in the ecosystem
 The whole system itself literally and quite straightforwardly shapes and forms
its component parts
 Man’s evolutionary moral development is moving towards seeing things less
individualistically, but rather more holistically as human beings become more
enlightened towards altruistic feelings of benevolence, sympathy, and loyalty.
 Using Darwin’s ideas, such feelings are deeply rooted in man’s evolutionary
process from our pre-human ancestors as part of the natural selection
process.
 Holistic Entities or
Communities (Land Ethic)
- Ecocentrism
 Callicott: we may reach a point where human beings would be
enlightened towards one global community where everyone considers
all human beings as members of one world community and where
everyone abides by one common ethics of humanity.
 Leopold: obligations are meaningless without conscience and the
problems we face are the extension of the social conscience from
people to land
 Like Leopold, Callicott believes this is the next stage of moral evolution
where a universal ecological literacy would trigger sympathy and
feeling for fellow members of the biotic community and feelings of
loyalty and patriotic regard for the community as a whole.
 Holistic Entities or
Communities (Land Ethic)
- Ecocentrism
Rolson (Challenges in Environmental Ethics): need for ecological
conscience for environmental ethics to take a foothold
 Environmental ethics is not a muddle; it is an invitation to moral
development.
 All ethics seeks an appropriate respect for life, but respect for
human life is only a subset of respect for all life.
 What ethics is all about, ultimately, is seeing outside your own
sector of self-interest, of class interest.
 A comprehensive ethic will find value in and duty to the natural
world.
 Holistic Entities or
Communities (Land Ethic)
- Ecocentrism
 An ecological conscience requires an unprecedented mix of
science and conscience, of biology, and ethics
 Assumes the equal baseline or intrinsic value of all living
organisms, accepting that each has a good or purpose to fulfill on
its own.
 Recognizes intrinsic value for species and ecosystem as wholes.
 Synthesizes individualistic and holistic approaches of biocentrism
and ecocentrism, respectively
 Species have intrinsically more value than an individual specimen
 In an evolutionary ecosystem, it is not mere individuality that
counts, but the species is also significant because it is a dynamic
life form maintained over time.
 Holistic Entities or
Communities (Land Ethic)
- Ecocentrism
 Recognizes the role of ecosystems in supporting and
preserving, thus providing environment for
individual plants and animals to flourish (systemic
value)
 The system is value transformer where form and
being process in reality, fact and value are
inseparably joined.
 Synthesizes both individualistic and holistic
approaches into ecocentrism.