Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:



Displaying: 1-12 of 12 documents


news and notes
1. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
NEWS AND NOTES
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
features
2. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
Roger Fjellstrom Equality Does Not Entail Equality across Species
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
I critique Peter Singer’s view that equality across species is a natural extension of equality. Singer presents one minor and two major arguments. The first major argument is that equality across species is implied by the traditional principle of equality. The second is that it follows from a conception that is behind the principle of equality, namely the moral “point of view of the universe.” The minor argument is a theory of the altruistic character and expanding circles of ethics.
3. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
Peter Lucas Environmental Ethics: Between Inconsequential Philosophy and Unphilosophical Consequentialism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Andrew Light and Eric Katz commend environmental pragmatism as a framework of choice for a more pluralistic, and (consequently) more practically effective environmental ethics. There is however a prima facie conflict between the promotion of pluralism and the promotion of pragmatism. I consider two different routes by which Light has attempted to resolve this conflict. Light’s first strategy involves distinguishing philosophical from metaphilosophical forms of pragmatism, locating its “metatheoretically pluralist” potential in the latter. I argue that the distinction collapses, leaving the conflict unresolved. Light’s second strategy involves interpreting metatheoretical pluralism as a form of practical compatibilism. I argue that metatheoretical pluralism, thus interpreted, holds no remedy for the perceived practical ineffectiveness of the field. Not only would it fail to qualify as a viable form of pluralism, but its widespread adoption would actively undermine the real work of environmental ethics: that of fostering a senseof the special significance of enlightened and principled action in defense of environmentalist ideals, in the face of the consequentialism which dominates global environmental decision making.
discussion papers
4. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
Kenneth B. Peter Jefferson and the Independence of Generations
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Thomas Jefferson’s argument against long-term debt and his theory of usufruct are used to show why each generation is obligated to protect the independence of future generations. This argument forms the theory of “Jeffersonian generational independence.” The theory has wide implications for the environmental movement because most environmental problems result in limitations on the liberty of future generations. I compare and defend Jeffersonian generational independence from two alternatives including the investment theory raised by James Madison and the problem of generational interdependence raised by John Passmore or Edmund Burke. When the obligation to protect the independence of future generations is taken seriously, liberalism can no longer reasonably be used to defend environmental exploitation, since such exploitation amounts to an attack on the liberty and independence which form its core values.
5. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
Peter S. Wenz Environmental Synergism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Some anthropocentrists, such as Bryan Norton, claim that intergenerational anthropocentrism provides the best rationale for protecting biodiversity. Some nonanthropocentrists, such as J. Baird Callicott and Eric Katz, disagree. In the present paper, I analyze different varieties of anthropocentrism, argue for adopting what is here called multicultural anthropocentrism, and then advance the following thesis of environmental synergism: combining multicultural anthropocentrism with nonanthropocentrism enables synergists to argue more cogently and effectively than either anthropocentrists or previous nonanthropocentrists for policies that both protect biodiversity and maximize long-term welfare for human beings as a group.
6. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
Susanne E. Foster Aristotle and the Environment
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
There are three potential problems with using virtue theory to develop an environmental ethic. First, Aristotelian virtue theory is ratiocentric. Later philosophers have objected that Aristotle’s preference for reason creates a distorted picture of the human good. Overvaluing reason might well bias virtue theory against the value of non-rational beings. Second, virtue theory is egocentric. Hence, it is suited to developing a conception of the good life, but it is not suited to considering obligations to others. Third, virtue theory is notoriously bad at providing rules and procedures for resolving ethical questions about particular circumstances. But environmentalists need procedures for determining which of several conflicting values is most important. Virtue theory is not action guiding. I respond to each of these problems. I show that virtue theory is uniquely suited to answering ethical questions about nonhuman animals and the environment.
book reviews
7. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
David Boonin Animal, Vegetable, or Woman?: A Feminist Critique of Ethical Vegetarianism
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
8. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
Ronald P. Morrison No Man’s Garden: Thoreau and a New Vision for Civilization and Nature
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
9. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
Gary Backhaus Safeguarding Our Common Future: Rethinking Sustainable Development
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
comment
10. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
John Lemons A Reply to “From Aldo Leopold to the Wildlands Project”
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
index
11. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
INDEX FOR 2002
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
referees
12. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 24 > Issue: 4
REFEREES 2002
view |  rights & permissions | cited by