|
 |
 |
Ethics & the Environment, Volume 2, Number 2, Fall 1997
ABSTRACTS
Environmental Values and Environmental Law in New Zealand
Alastair S. Gunn and Carolyn McCallig
We examine the relation between environmental ethics and environmental law, focusing on
the New Zealand resource Management Act 1991. This is a comprehensive and philosophical
grounded statute that was the first of its kind in the world. we analyze key concepts
in the law including sustainability, resources, stewardship, natural character, and
intrinsic law, which we try to resolve from a "weak anthropocentric" position.
Affluence, Poverty, and Ecology: Obligation, International Relations, and Sustainable Development
Paul G. Harris
Effective efforts to protect the global environment will require the willing cooperation of
the world's poor. Persuading them to join international environmental agreements and to
choose environmentally sustainable development requires substantial concessions from the
affluent industrialized countries, including additional financial assistance and technology
transfers. The affluent countries ought to provide such assistance to the world's poor for
ethical reasons. Doing so would promote transnational distributive justice, which is defined
here as a fair and equitable distribution among countries of benefits, burdens and decision
making authority, in this case associated with transnational environmental relations.
Conceptions of distributive justice examined include utilitarianism, human rights,
causality/responsibility, impartiality, and principles derived from Kantian and Rawlsian ethics.
Gleaning Lessons from Deep Ecology
David Keller
By reflecting on Deep Ecology, several lessons can be culled for environmental philosophy
in general. The Deep Ecology of Arne Naess, Bill Devall, and George Sessions is
appropriately characterized as a theory founded on the principles of biocentric
egalitarianism and metaphysical holism. After considering each of these principles in turn,
and then in relation to each other, the lesson turns out to be that the ontological
foundation for environmental ethics must be nonegalitarian and polycentric.
Prospecting for Ecological Gold amongst the Platonic Forms: A Response to Timothy Mahoney
Val Plumwood
Timothy Mahoney discovers and champions an ecologically benign account of Plato in
opposition to my own critical analysis of the reason-centeredness, reason-nature dualism,
and nature and body devaluation in the Platonic dialogues, in which multiple linked
dualism of reason and nature associated with systems of oppression provide major
organizing principles for Platonic philosophy. I show first that Mahoney's criticisms of
my interpretation involve some careless and mistaken readings of my own text. Second, I
argue that Mahoney's account of nature is significantly different from Plato's, and that
his interpretation of Plato is an overly generous and idealized one which plays on the
multiplicity and elasticity of the concept of nature and the notorious vagueness of the
concept of participation to conflate, among other things, Plato's attitude to celestial
nature with his attitude to biological nature. Mahoney's interpretation involves setting
aside the issue of Plato's most offensive and revealing passages of earth disparagement,
ignoring the network of social meanings from which Plato's philosophy emerges. Finally,
I give some reasons why Mahoney's accounts of participation and nature, even considered
as a reworking of Plato, would be highly problematic as the foundation for an ecological
philosophy.
Marxism and Animal Rights
David Sztybel
There is no doubt that Marx and Engels rejected animal rights. However, they did
embrace the communist principle, "From each according to his abilities, to each
according to his need." Furthermore, they acknowledge that nonhuman animals have
needs. So the principle can enjoin us to respect animals' needs, even if they lack
certain abilities (e.g., tool-making, perhaps even self-consciousness). I argue
that it is essentially speciesist to restrict this principle to human beings, and
that its acceptance implies either animal rights or a substantive equivalent.
Marxism may have to undergo a profound dialectical transformation in light of the
implications of its own maxim.
A Vegetarian Critique of Deep and Social Ecology
David Waller
For all their antagonism, deep and social ecology do share at least this much: a lack
of interest in the issues of animal rights, animal welfare, and vegetarianism. I
argue that this disinterest is inconsistent with deep and social ecology's practical
programs and philosophical foundations. Furthermore, while they ignore the animals'
case for special moral recognition, both schools nevertheless exploit our special
feelings (pro and con) toward animals in order to advance their own agendas
concerning nature.
|
|
|
 |