More events to be announced soon. More info to come.
References and Further Reading 1. Extending Moral Standing As noted above, perhaps the most fundamental question that must be asked when regarding a particular environmental ethic is simply, what obligations do we have concerning the natural environment?
Thus, an anthropocentric ethic claims that only human beings are morally considerable in their own right, meaning that all the direct moral obligations we possess, including those we have with regard to the environment, are owed to our fellow human beings.
While the history of western philosophy is dominated by this kind anthropocentrism, it has come under considerable attack from many environmental ethicists. Such thinkers have claimed that ethics must be extended beyond humanity, and that Endangered species essay outline standing should be accorded to the non-human natural world.
Some have claimed that this extension should run to sentient animals, others to individual living organisms, and still others to holistic entities such as rivers, species and ecosystems. Under these ethics, we have obligations in respect of the environment because we actually owe things to the creatures or entities within the environment themselves.
Determining whether our environmental obligations are founded on anthropocentric or non-anthropocentric reasoning will lead to different accounts of what those obligations are. This section examines the prominent accounts of moral standing within environmental ethics, together with the implications of each.
This should be of little surprise, since many of the concerns we have regarding the environment appear to be concerns precisely because of the way they affect human beings.
For example, pollution diminishes our health, resource depletion threatens our standards of living, climate change puts our homes at risk, the reduction of biodiversity results in the loss of potential medicines, and the eradication of wilderness means we lose a source of awe and beauty.
Quite simply then, an anthropocentric ethic claims that we possess obligations to respect the environment for the sake of human well-being and prosperity. Despite their human-centeredness, anthropocentric environmental ethics have nevertheless played a part in the extension of moral standing.
This extension has not been to the non-human natural world though, but instead to human beings who do not yet exist.
The granting of moral standing to future generations has been considered necessary because of the fact that many environmental problems, such as climate change and resource depletion, will affect future humans much more than they affect present ones.
Moreover, it is evident that the actions and policies that we as contemporary humans undertake will have a great impact on the well-being of future individuals. In light of these facts, some philosophers have founded their environmental ethics on obligations to these future generations Gewirth, Of course, it is one thing to say that human beings in the future have moral standing, it is quite another to justify the position.
Indeed, some philosophers have denied such standing to future people, claiming that they lie outside of our moral community because they cannot act reciprocally Golding, So, while we can act so as to benefit them, they can give us nothing in return.
This lack of reciprocity, so the argument goes, denies future people moral status.
However, other philosophers have pointed to the fact that it is usually considered uncontroversial that we have obligations to the dead, such as executing their wills and so on, even though they cannot reciprocate Kavka, While still others have conceded that although any future generation cannot do anything for us, it can nevertheless act for the benefit of its own subsequent generations, thus pointing to the existence of a broader transgenerational reciprocity Gewirth, However, perhaps we do not have obligations to future people because there is no definitive group of individuals to whom such obligations are owed.
This argument is not based on the simple fact that future people do not exist yet, but on the fact that we do not know who they will be. The heart of this problem lies in the fact that the policies adopted by states directly affect the movement, education, employment and so on of their citizens.
Thus, such policies affect who meets whom, and who has children with whom. So, one set of policies will lead to one group of future people, while another set will lead to a different group. Our actions impact who will exist in the future, making our knowledge of who they will be incomprehensible.
Since there is no definitive set of future people to receive the benefits or costs of our actions, to whom do we grant moral standing? Secondly, and of particular importance for environmental ethics, how could any future people legitimately complain that they have been wronged by our environmentally destructive policies?Nov 30, · Unlike previous extinctions 99% of the species, listed on the endangered species list, established by the endangered species act, became threatened due to human activities Continue Reading + All Endangered Species Essays.
Study Flashcards On Practice Questions CNA State exam at plombier-nemours.com Quickly memorize the terms, phrases and much more. plombier-nemours.com makes it easy to get the grade you want! The Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue.
The Endangered Species Act was established in to protect endangered species.
Climate change, caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, has serious consequences for many species, but it is a great concern for polar bears. If you’re applying for a scholarship, chances are you are going to need to write an essay. Very few scholarship programs are based solely on an application form or transcript.
Free endangered species papers, essays, and research papers.