.The perceived inadequacy of traditional approaches to ethical theory
Assuming (as many environmentalists and environmental ethicists have) that an adequate environmental ethic must have a more inclusive view of what has moral standing or intrinsic value than either anthropocentric or sentientist views, we can see why traditional ethical theories look like unlikely candidates.
Anthropocentric? Sentientist? Biocentric individualist? Holist? Utilitarianism If happiness is construed narrowly enough On a less narrow conception of happiness Definitely not Definitely not Rights views The traditional focus of rights views A readily conceivable extension of the rights tradition Nonconscious organisms are not plausible candidates within the tradition Nor are ecosystems and species Kantianism Only individuals with practical rationality count Maybe some non-human animals have it But not non-conscious organisms And not species or ecosystems (But the above assumption is open to question!)
| [Back to index] |