Introduction
There are a number of moral controversies that crop up in environmental sciences from time to time. In order to resolve those moral dilemmas, society must look towards a series of principles and values i.e. environmental ethics. When a certain ecosystem is at risk and there is a need to eliminate some overpopulated species to preserve it, some would wonder whether this is a moral act or not. Alternatively, when certain members of a community engage in slash and burn techniques so as to get more land for farming, one would wonder what is wrong with such actions. These issues and many others can be resolved through a thorough understanding of environmental ethics as will be seen below.
Elements of western thought that I think are of value for an environmental ethic
A number of values among western thinkers are seen as contrary to environmental ethics. For instance, Aristotle put forward the notion that man’s needs were superior to all other things in nature and he even added that these things were supposed to serve the needs of man. In essence Aristotle held an anthropocentric position claiming that in order to find value in something, one must gauge that value on the basis of what it can do for man. In other words, this was an instrumentalist approach where non-human things are seen as means towards achieving certain goals and not goals in themselves.
Similarly, Atomists assert that every human being must be treated as being separate and distinct from all other parts of this planet. In other words, adherents to this school of thought claim that there is no such thing as a planetary community of which the human species is part of.
While the latter points of view may seem very distant from ecological sciences and the environment, there are still a few lessons that one can draw from those teachings and extend them to the natural environment. For instance, Aristotle often claimed that all human beings must be governed by virtue ethics in order to live a flourishing life. This means that virtues such as courage, piety and benevolence are fundamental. Likewise, environmental ethicists can argue that a flourishing life should not just mean having respect, care or love for humans alone but these virtues must also be extended to all other components of man’ world i.e. his environment.
Another philosopher who brings in a lot of insight into the field of environmental ethics is Hume. Hume discusses what the ‘natural’ environment truly is and whether this can be linked to human life. According to him, there is a basic assumption that most people make about nature; that when a certain thing is not interfered with, then it possesses intrinsic value and vice versa. He however points out that ‘being natural’ is an ambiguous statement because there are still a number of other qualities that a particular thing may possess aside from their being natural that can contribute towards the morality of one’s actions towards it.
Consequently, this thinker brought in a very important dimension into the environmental ethic circles because he assisted members of this group to address a series of issues that are related to human preservation. Ecological restoration is sometimes necessary in the event that a certain wilderness or national park is under the danger of being lost. Through Hume’s principles, environmental ethicists can now defend the process of ecological management; this necessitates human intervention to curb nature’s losses. It can therefore be argued that Hume’s (a utilitarian) thoughts are of great value to environmental ethics.
Utilitarianism is seen as central to the former mentioned field because of its underlying principles. Utilitarians normally assert that the morality of actions are assessed based on their ability to restore pleasure and minimize pain. This is why philosopher Bentham claims that when determining whether an action is ethically acceptable or not, one must look at how that action has affected all the parties that are capable of undergoing pain or pleasure even when those parties are not human.
These principles have been expanded further to include ecological sciences and it has been found that most utilitarians only consider the rights of those beings that can experience pleasure and pain. This means that their overall concern is with animal liberation and human rights as these are the only things that can experience those feelings. Additionally, utilitarian principles would therefore contradict the concern over other non sentient things such as rivers, mountains, plants and landscapes.
However, some utilitarian principles are even contradictory to a number of environmental actions. For instance, since these proponents believe that morally right actions are those that increase pleasure, then it can be argued that burning ivory to get money generated from jewellery is right in the eyes of the utilitarian. However, this is intolerable among environmental ethicists.
All in all, it can be said that depending on only one type of western thought cannot be sufficient enough to resolve any moral dilemma related to the environment. Instead, a more holistic approach needs to be embraced where individuals look at all the elements within other theories that are applicable to the environment and then embrace them. Central to this concern is the need to look at man as being part of a global community and not as assumed in most early schools of western thought. However, among the ones discussed, Hume’s assertions are more in line with these principles than earlier schools of thought such as those one put forward by Bentham, Aristotle or by atomists.
Description of the components of the science based secular humanist environmental ethic
Secular humanists are governed by the need to promote or encourage good life for the entire society and also for its individuals. These proponents also claim that ethics goes beyond one’s race, religion, ethnicity and other traditional parameters. Here, there is the belief that different lifestyles and beliefs need to be tolerated in order to defend all human rights. In other words, this is where the word secular emanates.
This ethical principle is one that embraces some of the needs and interests that are common to the globe. Issues such as responsibility, honesty, being dependable are seen as central to the sentient and to humans. In fact, it can be said that these civic virtues are the ones that constitute the humanist aspect of secular humanism and are actually responsible for ensuring that every individual is according to their rightful place within society. The merger of secular and humanist principles is what constitutes this particular school of thought.
After an examination of the various elements that make up secular humanism, then it is essential to tie this to environmental ethics. A number of modern thinkers have claimed that secular environmentalists need to place their thoughts into actions by demonstrating this within the environment. These proponents support the latter arguments by claiming that all secular humanists are grounded by the respect for science which is what is found in ecological sciences. Besides that, Secular humanists are guided by the need to look for human solutions for human problems. This means that they are in essence naturalists and this generally falls in line with environmental ethics.
In other words, there are three components to secular humanist environmental ethics that have been revealed so far. First, there is the scientific aspect grounded on solid facts that have been scientifically proven. The second component is that of possessing the humanistic aspect in the environment where a series of issues are brought out when looking into some of the matters that could be confronting this group such as climate change.
The third component is related to the parties that are affected by the moral question. These adherents believe that sentient beings need to be protected. Consequently certain aspects such as animal liberation are in line with their beliefs because they invoke ethical, humanist and secular principles. They are ethical because they cause one to resort to a moral directive. They are secular because they rely upon common human and sentient interests. Lastly, they are humanistic because they appeal to the virtues that govern this principle.
Another example is the issue of preserving other non sentient parts of the earth. Secular humanists propagate the latter belief because they believe in making the natural environment more sustainable for man or for beings that can experience pain or pleasure. They think of environmental conservation as being a long term strategy for making the lives of other humans (in the future generation) more conductive than it is currently. It should therefore be noted that secular humanist environmental principles are essentially instrumental in that they only assess the morality of a certain environmental function based on that action’s ability to create value for man.
An environmental ethic for my generation Awareness
The current environmental crisis
The environmental crisis is over expansion of corporations into wilderness areas. The latter action has become a huge problem because it is causing rapid reduction in wilderness areas, forest reserves and other ecologically vulnerable areas. Society could be placing itself in a dangerous situation where such ecosystems may become scarcer and this may lead to imbalances in the state of equilibrium. Not only is this ethically wrong, but it could also be reverberated back to man who may lack resources for a more sustainable future.
Prospect
After solving such a crisis, it is likely that there will be greater forms of forests and wilderness and other similar natural environments where different organisms can co-exist in their natural habitats
Attitude
Ethical first principles applied
The latter prospects have been governed by environmental ethicists such as Naess who believe that appreciating nature in an aesthetic way can lead to the development of human life. According to this philosopher, the wilderness, mountainous areas, forest regions all possess certain intrinsic good and they must therefore be appreciated for what they are.
Current attitudes to be overcome in our society
The major attitude that has propelled corporate overexpansion is overemphasis on consumption rather than citizenry. If people were to think of themselves as being members of a larger community that i.e. the earth, then chances are that this overexpansion would have been minimised. People are largely driven by monetary goals or economic ones and they tend to forget what they stand to achieve if they were to embrace more environmentally sound principles. In other words, the underlying reason behind this increased the level of corporate expansions is the anthropocentric school of thought where man only thinks of himself as being the centre of the earth and that the rest of the planet is supposed to be dominated by him. If this problem were to be solved properly, then there would be a need to eradicate such attitudes.
Action
Principles or guidelines to be followed
The first principle that must be adhered to is that economics must not be overdone because the environment needs to take precedence. This means that the economy should not be ignored completely from environmental issues but this needs to be kept under check. The governing principle here is deep ecology
Current best practice, personal and political action
Sensitisation of these corporations needs to be carried out. Additionally, state laws need to be passed so as to restrict some of these corporations from entering into areas that represent nature without any interference
Conclusion
Ethical theories cannot be eliminated from any serious discussion of environmental ethics because they form the basis upon which nature or value is defined. The most fundamental principle that surrounds ethics is based on the fact that man is part of the global community and that he is not merely a consumer but a member of such a community.
References
Lori Gruen & Dale Jamieson. 1994. Reflecting on nature: readings in Environmental philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dryzek, John. 1997. The politics of the earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zimmerman, Michael. Environmental Philosophy: From Animal rights to radical ecology. New York: Routledge.