Environmental Ethics as a Branch of Environmental Philosophy - Assignment Example

Environmental Ethics Environmental Ethics Environmental ethics is a branch of environmental philosophy supported by varying ethics that integrates both humans and non-humans in protecting the ecosystem. However, to achieve these noble goals and objectives, environmental ethics must collaborate with other disciplines such as environmental geography and environmental law among others. The idea is meant to infuse different ethical decisions that respect nature through both individualistic and holistic approaches. A case in point is determining the role of environmental obligations and their overall impact on future generations especially in the modern age. Another critical factor entails the right of humans in preventing the extinction of endangered species without harming the existence of the human race. Propagation of certain species is equally a daunting task because it controls human consumption when expanding life. 1. According to Palmer’s view concerning environmental ethics, there are certain pertinent approaches or perspectives that are worth noting. However, it is essential to define environmental ethics as the protection of the habit under a philosophy that transcends the boundaries of humans. Therefore, the identifying perspectives, I believe conservation of space environment is the most instrumental step to expand life and secure meaningful existence. It is because diverse authors profess different alternatives such as the libertarian extension that has a civil liberty approach to it when dealing with the environment. According to its main advocate, Andrew Brennan, giving animals an ecological feeling is one of the fundamental methods of protection ontological species (Pojman & Pojman, 2012). The views echo Palmer’s whereby an ecologic humanism is integrated into safeguarding the flora and fauna found within human surrounding. The approach symbolizes a deep ecology supported by most authors including Peter Singer who attest that connecting an intrinsic value with the environment is a vital step to support ecologic extension. Alan Marshall is equally attached to the ecologic extension because his perspective values the fundamental interdependence of most biological entities instead of human rights. Consequently, he adopts a scientific reflection of understanding the natural world as opposed to the political reflection noted in the Libertarian Extension. Alternatively, in conservation ethics, the usefulness and utility of the environment to humans is accorded a higher value. Overall, as observed by Palmer, environmental ethics should develop a mutual relationship between biological entities and living beings for peaceful existence. 2. Other authors have also attempted to comprehend environmental ethics from a Judeo-Christian roots approach. An example is Dobel in his essay Greening of Spirituality that tries to connect biblical teachings to the present environmental crisis. For instance, he draws his views from the books Lamentations and Numbers where humans are admonished against plunging world into darkness. The message echoes the views propagated to the readings from Genesis 1-3 where God creates light as a means of redemption. According to Dobel, this scenario highlights Judeo-Christian roots that continue to implicate the Western world in perpetrating environmental degradation at the expense of the universe. Integration of noble ethics is another guideline that guides ways of introducing an efficient work ethic with solutions from the Western nations. Therefore, Dobel asserts that mechanism of addressing the plight of biological entities should not be tied to one continent but spread across other countries with sound environmental laws. However, Freundel’s view from that differs from of Dobel’s in regards to understanding the operations of nature. According to Freundel, a partnership with God is the first step toward assessing the conflicting views of gaining a sustainable environmental ethic. I, thus, believe Dobel’s viewpoint is more plausible than Freundel’s because he bases his positions on biblical allusions to the significance of light in protection biological creatures. Additionally, while Freundel’s opinion is solely grounded on collaborating with God, it lacks feasible solutions such as those suggested by his counterpart. It means adoption of both ideas by scholars is critical, but using Dobel’s perspective remains the long-term solution. 3. Shue’s principles that are meant to achieve fair or equitable distribution of costs for safeguarding the environment is effective for controlling global warming. This is because it is guided by normative ethics that advocate for equal responsibility by both developed and developing nations toward integrating workable solutions to environmental problems. Additionally, the allocation of costs is upon wealthy nations that possess the machinery of initiating change in order to reduce the negative effects of global warming. It suggests that Shue’s principles of a unifying approach are essential to find a common ground in nurturing an environmental ethic. Another view concerns the dispensation of justice through the rights-based approach while transferring certain resources to the poor folk. However, the unequal burden placed upon wealthy countries is meant to achieve a few things worth noting. First, by adopting a utilitarian position, developed countries will establish an impetus of using resources equally without favor in managing global warming. It means that distribution implications and other reasonable implications that are incompatible with the environment are totally eliminated to purify the habitat (Pojman & Pojman, 2012). Second, encompasses the use of equal entitlements approach in fighting the negative repercussions necessitated by environmental pollution. In other words, Western nations have the moral obligation to produce only greenhouse gas emissions sustainable to the current atmospheric conditions. As a result, the principles proposed by Shue are based finding a common balance toward equitable distribution of both costs and resources vital in reducing global warming. 4. Major differences exist between holistic and individualistic approaches to environmental ethic. For instance, while holistic view believes the universe is a single whole that accommodates all creatures meaning animals and plants, the individualistic approach differs. The latter posits that a human being is independent and should not be drawn into the ecological wars of nature. It signifies dissociation from the moral responsibilities of understanding how organisms impact on the entire human race. On the other hand, according to the holism approach, the ecosystem is only complete with the inclusion and participation of individuals in offering it protection. Therefore, issues of achieving an environmental ethic based on the tenets of integrity, stability, and diversity are instrumental to enable individuals gain interest in the environment. Likewise, while the individualistic approach supports a person’s rights and liberties, it does not support the need for sacrificing human life in place of a plant. According to the group, protection of humanity’s existence is paramount step toward gaining ecological unity as opposed to the holism view of neutrality in environmental ethic. In the same capacity, holism echoes ecocentric theories in protecting the ecological systems through a moral standing unlike the hard stance developed by the biocentrism views. It is an idea supported individualistic approach through its conceptualization of the being as the first important centre of the universe in comprehending the ecosystem. The guiding entities guiding their view are based on ethical systems that have variations supported by non-anthropocentric notions such as the respect of both nature and human beings. It, therefore, is imperative to understand how different environmental ethic approaches work in tandem with the desired goals and objectives of humans. This is because numerous functions are founded on protecting both flora and fauna using perspectives that are integral for future generations. According to most authors, environmental ethic should find a basis in equality and equity in the allocation of resources (Pojman & Pojman, 2012). The step will harmonize the expected roles of both rich and poor countries when managing issues that include global warming and its ramifications to the human race. Introduction of religious values of sustaining light within nature as proposed by Dobel will also result to sustainable protection of the habit. Overall, it helps if both modern and traditional methods are inculcated in achieving a sound environmental ethic. Reference Pojman, L. & Pojman, P. (2012). Environmental Ethics: Readings in Theory and Application. Boston, MA: Wadsworth. Read More