Slide 1
Who or what counts morally
Environmental ethics asks how humans should relate to nonhuman life and ecological systems. It examines whether their value depends entirely on human interests.
More to Read
An anthropocentric account places human interests at the centre. Nonanthropocentric approaches extend moral consideration beyond them, but disagree about whether individuals, species or ecosystems are the appropriate focus.
Slide 2
Useful and valuable differ
Something can have instrumental value because it serves another end. Intrinsic value concerns value not exhausted by such usefulness.
More to Read
A forest may provide timber and recreation while also being judged worth protecting for reasons independent of those services. Stating the distinction does not settle which account of value is correct; it identifies the disagreement.
Slide 3
Individuals and wholes can conflict
Protecting an ecosystem can sometimes require actions that harm individual organisms. Environmental ethics must address tensions between different objects of concern.
More to Read
Managing an introduced species can raise this issue. A policy may aim to protect ecological relationships while imposing costs on individual animals, so naming the aim alone does not answer every ethical question.
Slide 4
Future people have a stake
Environmental choices can affect people who cannot participate in present decisions. Intergenerational ethics asks how their interests should be represented.
More to Read
A short-lived benefit may leave a long-lasting burden. The difference in timing creates questions about responsibility and fairness, not merely a technical problem of forecasting the physical effects accurately.
Slide 5
Facts and values work together
Ecological evidence informs what actions are likely to do. Ethical reasoning addresses which effects matter and how competing responsibilities should be weighed.
More to Read
In the forest example, better habitat data can correct a mistaken prediction, but it does not alone determine the weight given to livelihoods, nonhuman life and future generations. A decision needs both kinds of reasoning.
Sources
- Environmental Ethics
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy