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

Browse by:



Displaying: 21-40 of 47 documents


book reviews
21. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
Jim Cheney In the Spirit of the Earth: Rethinking History and Time
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
22. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
David Orr Green Delusions: An Environmentalist Critique of Radical Environmentalism
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
comment
23. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
Frederik Kaufman Warren on the Logic of Domination
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
24. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
Ron Erickson On Environmental Virtue Ethics
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
news and notes
25. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
NEWS AND NOTES
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
from the editor
26. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Overcoming Environmental Newspeak
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
features
27. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Karen Green Freud, Wollstonecraft, and Ecofeminism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
I examine recent arguments to the effect that there are significant logical, conceptual, historical, or psychosexual connections between the subordination of women and the subordination of nature and argue that they are all problematic. Although there are important connections between women’s emancipation and the achievement of important environmental goals, they are practical connections rather than conceptual ones.
28. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Robert Elliot Extinction, Restoration, Naturalness
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Alastair S. Gunn has argued that it is in principle possible to restore degraded natural environments and to restore their full value, provided that species distinctive to them are extant. I argue, first, that the proviso is unnecessary. More importantly, I claim that full value cannot be restored because restored environments lack the relational property of being naturally evolved. I delineate and explain the structure and detail of the theoretical bases for this claim and show that Gunn’s reflections do not rule out the view that full value cannot be restored.
29. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
G. W. Burnett, Kamuyu wa Kang’ethe Wilderness and the Bantu Mind
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In the West, it is widely believed that, since Africans lack an emotional experience with romanticism and transcendentalism, they do not possess the philosophical prerequisites necessary to protect wilderness. However, the West’s disdain for African systems of thought has precluded examination of customary African views of wilderness. Examination of ethnographic reports on Kenya’s Highland Bantu reveals a complex view of phenomena that the West generally associates with wilderness. For the Bantu, wilderness is an extension of human living space, and through concerted social action rather than individual initiative, it is, or at least can be, dominated by society. Wildlife is unnatural and alienated from human society, which is natural. Because wilderness is, consequently, understood to be fearsome and hostile, it is not a place that can provide inspiration or self-actualization. Almost all forests have a special spiritual relationship with humankind, and some trees have a special relationship with God. Althoughtraditional Bantu thought is contrary to a concept of wilderness as conserved, managed space filled with tourists and recreators, it does embrace a concept of wilderness as wildlands. The Bantu have gone to considerable length to develop an approach to wilderness that minimizes individual contact while requiring association with wilderness as a social activity. Population growth and want of vocational opportunities continue to thrust Highland Bantu into wilderness as a fundamental and traditional survival technique.
discussion papers
30. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
John M. Gowdy, Peg Olsen Further Problems with Neoclassical Environmental Economics
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
We examine the merits of neoclassical environmental economics and discuss alternative approaches to it. We argue that the basic assumptions of the neoclassical approach, embodied in the indifference curve, make that model inappropriate for environmental analysis. We begin by assuming that the basic postulates of the neoclassical model hold and then argue that even this ideal state is incompatible with environmental sustainability. We discuss the role of the discount rate, the exclusive emphasis on marginal choices, and the assumption of perfect information.
31. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Danne W. Polk Gabriel Marcel’s Kinship to Ecophilosophy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Gabriel Marcel spent most of his life developing a phenomenology of human intersubjectivity. While doing so he discovered the extent to which an authentic human community depends upon the relationship it has to nonhuman nature. By exploring Marcel’s critique of technology, as well as his religious phenomenology, I show the proximity to which Marcel’s philosophy approaches the currentegalitarian response of the radical ecology movement. Even though the bulk of Marcel’s work is concerned with human intersubjectivity, his writings advocate a transcendence of anthropocentricism to what Marcel calls “cosmocentricism,” an existential attitude toward the world which submits to the sacredness of all beings, as well as to the bioregions within which all earthly creatures share the sacraments of life.
32. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Ralph R. Acampora Using and Abusing Nietzsche for Environmental Ethics
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Max Hallman has put forward an interpretation of Nietzsche’s philosophy according to which Nietzsche is a prototypical deep ecologist. In reply, I dispute Hallman’s main interpretive claim as well as its ethical and exegetical corollaries. I hold that Nietzsche is not a “biospheric egalitarian,” but rather an aristocratically individualistic “high humanist.” A consistently naturalistic transcendentalist, Nietzsche does submit a critique of modernity’s Christian-inflected anthropocentrism (pace Hallman), and yet—in his later work—he endorses exploitation in the quest for nobility (contra Hallman). I conclude thatecophilosophers need to exercise hermeneutical caution in any attempt to appropriate Nietzsche for environmentally ethical designs, lest they illegitimately ventriloquize their own moral voices into an authoritative but alien mouthpiece.
33. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Deane Curtin Dōgen, Deep Ecology, and the Ecological Self
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
A core project for deep ecologists is the reformulation of the concept of self. In searching for a more inclusive understanding of self, deep ecologists often look to Buddhist philosophy, and to the Japanese Buddhist philosopher Dōgen in particular, for inspiration. I argue that, while Dōgen does share a nondualist, nonanthropocentric framework with deep ecology, his phenomenology of the self is fundamentally at odds with the expanded Self found in the deep ecology literature. I suggest, though I do not fully argue for it, that Dōgen’s account of the self is more sympathetic to one version of ecofeminism than to deep ecology.
news and notes
34. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
NEWS AND NOTES
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
book reviews
35. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
David Rothenberg Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
36. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 2
Holmes Rolston, III Environmental Ethics: An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
news and notes
37. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
NEWS AND NOTES
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
features
38. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Ned Hettinger Valuing Predation in Rolston’s Environmental Ethics: Bambi Lovers versus Tree Huggers
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Without modification, Rolston’s environmental ethics is biased in favor of plants, since he gives them stronger protection than animals. Rolston can avoid this bias by extending his principle protecting plants (the principle of the nonloss of goods) to human interactions with animals. Were he to do so, however, he would risk undermining his acceptance of meat eating and certain types of hunting. I argue,nevertheless, that meat eating and hunting, properly conceived, are compatible with this extended ethics. As the quintessential natural process, carnivorous predation is rightfully valued and respected by such environmentalists as Rolston. Because the condemnation of human participation in predation by animal activists suggests a hatred of nature, the challenge for Rolston’s animal activist critics is to show that one can properly appreciate natural predation while consistently and plausibly objecting to human participation in it.
39. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Alastair S. Gunn Environmental Ethics and Tropical Rain Forests: Should Greens Have Standing?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Almost everyone in the developed world wants the logging of tropical rain forests to stop. Like Antarctica, they are said to be much too important and much too valuable to be utilized just for development and are said to be part of a global heritage. However, it is not that simple. People in the developing world consider our criticisms to be ill-informed, patronizing, and self-serving. We are seen as having “dirty hands.” They hold that we neither have nor deserve moral standing as critics until we change our trade policies, rhetoric, and extravagant lifestyles.
discussion papers
40. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
John M. Gowdy Progress and Environmental Sustainability
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
One of the most pervasive ideas in Western culture is the notion of progress. Among economists, it is synonymous with economic growth. According to advocates of unlimited growth, more growth will result in a cleaner environment, a stable population level, and social and economic equality. Although most environmentalists do not subscribe to the growth ethic, they generally cling to a notion of progress by arguing that there has been continual enlightenment in public attitudes toward the environment and that this enlightenment can lead to environmental salvation. I argue that there is no convincingargument for past human progress and no reason to believe that it will occur in the future. Once we abandon notions of progress, we free ourselves to concentrate on making do with what we have rather than placing our hopes on some future material or ethical utopia.