Ethics Midterm Flashcards
- aims to define our moral responsibilities towards these issues, focusing on two main questions:
- What duties do we have toward the environment, and why?
- Addressing the “why” often precedes determining the “what,” as it involves understanding whether obligations are for current or future humans, or for the environment itself.
Environmental Ethics
- Is what our obligations are towards the environment. If these obligations are framed purely in terms of human benefit, the ethic is “___,” meaning it values only human interests.
- This view, dominant in _, has been challenged by those advocating for moral consideration of non-human entities, such as animals, organisms, or ecosystems.
The main question in environmental ethics
anthropocentric
Western philosophy
- Our current actions impact future humans.
- Moral Standing
– Justifying obligations to people we don’t yet know. - Challenges
- Future people cannot reciprocate.
– Obligations to the dead and transgenerational reciprocity as counterarguments.
ANTHROPOCENTRIC ETHICS AND FUTURE GENERATIONS
Extending Ethics to Future
Generations
- Issue: How can we owe obligations to future people when their identities are unknown?
- Critics’ View: Potential harm to future individuals despite overall benefits, akin to discriminatory practices.
The Non-Identity Problem
- Basic Needs: Future generations will require essential resources.
- Our obligation is to:
– Ensure future generations are not deprived of these necessities.
Philosophical Perspectives
Only humans have moral standing.
Example: Shooting a bear for fun would be permissible.
Intuition: Many feel harming animals, like shooting a bear or torturing a cat, is wrong.
Anthropocentric View:
PHILOSOPHERS ON ANIMAL RIGHTS
Peter Singer
Tom Regan
- Sentience: Ability to experience pleasure and pain.
Peter Singer
- Equal Consideration: Sentient beings’ interests should be weighed equally with human interests.
Peter Singer
- Utilitarian Framework: Aim for the greatest satisfaction of interests.
Peter Singer
- Rights-Based Approach: Conscious beings, or “__,” have inherent value.
Tom Regan
subjects-of-a-life
- Moral Rights: Rights impose limits on treatment, regardless of overall benefit.
Tom Regan
- Individual Rights: Cannot be overridden by greater good.
Tom Regan
- Critique: Too individualistic; may interfere with natural processes.
- Holistic Entities: Species and ecosystems sometimes conflict with individual animal rights.
- Example: Managing animal populations to prevent ecological damage (e.g., overpopulated rabbits).
CONFLICTS WITH ANIMAL-CENTERED ETHICS
Thought Experiment: “_”
* Scenario: Only one human and one tree remain; if the human destroys the tree,
* it feels intuitively wrong despite no harm to conscious beings.
* Implication: Suggests that individual living organisms, like trees, might have moral standing.
ETHICS ON INDIVIDUAL ORGANISMS
Moral Standing for All Living
Organisms
Last-Human Scenario
Do you believe in the theory of evolution?
Evidences that we have:
- Fossil Records
- Comparative Anatomy
- Embryology
- Molecular Evidence(DNA)
- Plants and Animals adapting
to the environment/prey/predators
Why do organisms evolve and adapt?
Due to:
- Adaptation to Environment?
- Natural Selection?
- Sexual Selection?
- But it is ultimately to survive
“Reverence for Life”
Albert Schweitzer’s
- Ethic: All living things have a
“will to live” and should not be
harmed unnecessarily.
Albert Schweitzer’s
- Critique: Concept of “will” may
not apply to many organisms.
Albert Schweitzer’s
- Teleological Centers of Life: Living organisms have inherent value and interests.
- Principles:
- Harm allowed in self-defense.
- Basic interests prioritized over non-basic.
- Self-sacrifice not required for others.
- Critiques of Taylor’s Approach
- Demanding Nature: May forbid actions like weeding a garden for aesthetic reasons.
- Hierarchical Approach: Plants have moral standing but with lower significance compared to humans.
Paul W. Taylor’s Perspective
CHALLENGES AND COUNTER ARGUMENTS
- Lack of Conscious Desire
- Individualistic Nature
Critics: Doubt attributing a “good” to organisms without conscious desires.
Counter: Biological flourishing can still be valuable even without conscious needs.
- Lack of Conscious Desire
Critics: Focus on individual organisms neglects ecosystems and species.
Proponents: Ecosystem concerns are integrated into ethics, though value is often tied to individual flourishing.
- Individualistic Nature
- Focus: Moral significance of entire
ecosystems or “land communities.”
HOLISTIC ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS
Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethics
- Concept: Land as a dynamic
system of energy flows involving
soils, plants, and animals.
Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethics
- Ethic: Actions are right if they
maintain the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community; wrong if they disrupt these qualities (Leopold, 1949/1989).
Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethics
- Criticisms:
Descriptive to Prescriptive: Transition from describing ecological systems to moral obligations lacks clarity on intrinsic value.
Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethics
Moral Sentiment: Leopold’s ethic appeals to emotional connections with the environment, expanding moral concern beyond human interests.
Defense by J. Baird Callicott
Criticisms:
* Objective Criteria: Ethics should be grounded in objective principles rather than personal feelings.
CHALLENGES TO SENTIMENT BASED ETHICS
- Functional Roles: Non-conscious entities like species and ecosystems have their own “good” based on their functional roles and life processes.
- Interests: These entities have interests that deserve consideration, even without conscious experiences.
Lawrence E. Johnson’s Alternative:
- Complex Questions:
Sacrificing Individuals: ____ might justify actions like culling invasive species for ecosystem preservation.
BALANCING INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS AND ECOSYSTEMS
Holistic ethics
Human Application: Potential for “___,” where human interests are sacrificed for ecological goals.
environmental fascism
Nested Communities: Moral obligations vary by the strength of commitments to different communities.
Example: Obligations to protect human communities may outweigh obligations to cull invasive species.
- Callicott’s Response
advocates for profound systemic changes to address environmental issues, challenging industrial capitalism and modern values
RADICAL ECOLOGY
It emphasizes deep systemic transformation, ecological sustainability, and intrinsic value of all life, often through direct activism and alternative worldviews.
RADICAL ECOLOGY
THE IDEAS OF RADICAL ECOLOGY
- Beyond Ethical Extensionism
- Holistic Reimagining
Critique: Traditional ethical approaches are criticized for being too human-centered.
Argument: Extending moral standing to non-human entities alone doesn’t address the deeper causes of environmental problems.
- Beyond Ethical Extensionism
Proposal: Shift in understanding our place within the natural world.
Advocacy: Integrate humans into the broader ecological system, rather than viewing them as separate or superior.
- Holistic Reimagining
POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGE
- Systemic Reform
- Ecological Justice:
- __: __ call for comprehensive changes in societal institutions, economic systems, and cultural norms to address environmental issues.
Systemic Reform: Radical ecologies
__: They emphasize the link between environmental harm and social inequalities, advocating for reforms that address both ecological and social injustices.
Ecological Justice
- The belief that animals have intrinsic value and should be treated with respect and consideration.
Animal Rights
- Focus: Moral and ethical considerations, protection from harm.
Animal Rights
- Concerned with the well-being of animals in human contexts, ensuring they are well-cared for in settings like farming or research.
Animal Welfare
- Focus: Humane treatment, quality of life within human use.
Animal Welfare
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
- Ancient Cultures
- Evolution
Animals were seen as sacred or possessing intrinsic value.
- Ancient Cultures