Our modern industrial society provides us with great physical and psychological comfort. We live not with a fear for our lives, we are politically stable and dominant; even the terrorist attacks against us cannot strip us of our safety bubble. We live with the luxury of convenience provided by our technologies, such as household appliances, personal computers, indoor heating and plumbing, personal automobiles with “endless fuel” the list is infinite. We live in a disposable society, where it is not commonplace to have material goods fixed, but rather replaced. We have disposable everything, diapers, water bottles, contacts, paintbrushes… again, our convenience is never-ending. This convenient lifestyle coupled with our massive desire for material goods has created immense devastation to the Earth. As time progresses we learn of more tragic outcomes of our lifestyles. I will discuss the major environmental tragedies that are facing our planet and possible solutions to the disasters. I will also give comparative thoughts by a handful of philosophers and dispute our moral obligations to the environment and for those whom occupy it. I feel that we need to do something soon to stop the destruction before it is too late. First off, the biggest argument for preserving the environment would be; we have an obligation to future generations. Singer discusses these thoughts in his chapter on environmental ethics in his book, Practical Ethics. He begins with the assumption that people are self-interested, and while current philosophy and economics fail to present answers to the problem of obligations to future generations, we still have them. He recognizes that we do not know exactly what future people will cherish; will they cho... ... middle of paper ... ...e need to come together and work towards a common goal: a cleaner America. Don’t think with tunnel vision, think long term, and consider how quickly humans have made an impact on the environment. Earth has been surviving with out us for millions of years and it took us a couple hundred to wreck havoc. There are small things that we can do everyday to help right here in Alma; recycle, walk to 7-11, bike to the baseball games, and etc. All great things start with an idea and starting is the hardest part. Sources * Flavin, Christopher. The Heat is On: The Greenhouse Effect. * Gross, Rita. Toward a Buddhist Environmental Ethic. * Pajman, Louis. Environmental Ethics: Reading in Theory and Application. Wadsworth Publishing Co. March 2002. * Singer, Peter. Practical Ethics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Solis, Hilda. “Environmental Justice: An Unalienable Right for All.” Human Rights 30 (2003): 5-6. JSTOR. Web. 13 February 2014.
I will begin this report with a summary of this great book and delve deeper into the thoughts that the literary family has of it. I will then go on to explain its importance in the development of environmental policy and impact, and end with my thoughts regarding the material and the interaction among social and environmental values and impacts presented by the author Michael Pollan.
Ethics is the study of how people should live. people have different views and beliefs of how they're supposed to live their life. people from all over the world have different ethical beliefs and different ways to determine which beliefs are right and which are wrong. when you visit a different country, you notice things they are doing and those things might seem wrong to you and you would never consider doing what they have just done but in their society its normal and everyone does it. inside the margins of this paper I am going to analyze the top three models used to determine a morally significant being based on the criteria in your book. I will first define a moral agent and a morally significant being then take you through the steps to deciding what a significant being is and which criteria you would use for each.
In 1989, seventy five percent of Americans identified themselves as environmentalists, and the number has continued to grow since then (Walls 1). Environmentalism is now the most popular social movement in the United States, with over five million American families donating regularly to environmental organizations (Walls 1). Environmentalists today focus on what kind of world they hope to see in the future, and largely deal with limiting pollution and changing consumption rates (Kent 1 and 9). Modern environmentalists also have much different issues than those Carson’s America faced. With climate change becoming more threatening each year, protection of the natural world is needed more than ever. Pollution has caused the warmest decade in history, the deterioration of the ozone layer, and species extinction in extreme numbers (Hunter 2). It not only threatens nature, but also human populations, who already suffer from lack of clean water and poisoning from toxic chemicals (Hunter 16). Unlike environmental actions in the 1960’s, which were mostly focused on protection, a massive increase in pollution has caused efforts to be focused on environmental restoration (Hunter 16). Like in the time of Silent Spring, environmentalists are not only concerned with one country. Protecting the environment remains a global issue, and every nation is threatened by the
Cases have been widely used in medical ethics and law. In both fields, numerous books and articles about cases have appeared, including book-length catalogs of cases. I argue that pluralistic casuistry provides an adequate approach to environmental ethics. It retains the strengths while avoiding the weaknesses of the other approaches. Importantly, it resolves some broader theoretical issues and provides a clear, explicit methodology for education and praxis.
Analyzing human obligation pertaining to all that is not man made, apart from humans, we discover an assortment of concerns, some of which have been voiced by philosophers such as Tom Regan, Peter Singer and Aldo Leopold. Environmentally ethical ideals hold a broad spectrum of perspectives that, not only attempt to identify a problem, but also focus on how that problem is addressed through determining what is right and wrong.
Other ethical questions such as “How should we- all living today evaluate the well-being of the future generations” (Brome). Scientific data shows that Global climate change will have some lasting effects on the planet, ecosystems and humans. There are many “risks associated with climate change such as the risk of pathogen, and disease” this will affect future generations, and animals this is why we should reduce our emissions of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere (Crank and Jacoby). “The consequences of heightening greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere appear after a time lag, often decades or more” (Somerville). Even though the current generations are “benefiting from cheap use of burning fossil fuels, and using the atmosphere as a free dump for our waste products” all humans are obligated to find a cleaner way to live so we don’t set future humans up for failure (Somerville). Somerville also explains that within us burning these fossil fuels, and ignoring the consequences “we sentence our children and grandchildren to cope with the resulting climate change” (Somerville). Also we need to take action to prevent further damage of Earth’s climate not only for the future children of the world but other species that we share the planet with. In the article “The Ethics of Climate Change” by John Broome he states that the answer to this ethical question can be easy one without the need of a sophisticated philosopher (Broome). He say that the answer to ethical climate change questions can be answered by simple common sense thinking (Broome). “You should not do something for your own benefit that will harm another’s” (Broome). He asks the question which is worse the death of a child in 2108 or the death of a child currently living?” (Broome). John Broome argues that we have a responsibility to
Discuss the concept of sustainability. What ethical principles are parts of a sustainable lifestyle? Why should we consider sustainability as a guiding principle of our environmental philosophy?
Every day when looking out a window, people see a beautiful earth. The earth is intriguing, but hinges on a delicate balance. Many natural resources keep the grass green and the sky blue. Man has made quite an impression on our world, and has transformed the earth's resources into tools to make life easy. However, mans' manipulation on earth has become detrimental to the health of our planet and the safety of mankind. Through the use and production of resources such as oil and energy, man is gradually poisoning the earth. Pollution has become such a dilemma in society; there is no real control or a feasible solution to society's recklessness. Without complete change, our system will collapse. The earth will eventually retaliate with disaster, or corporate control of our economy will cause hysteria and depression. Evaluation of the consequences and repercussion of worldwide pollution, may give people a better idea of what the future holds.
Thesis Statement: Instead of focusing on the greenhouse gases that are being put into the atmosphere with the cars we drive, we should very much be trying to conserve the all of the access energy that we are using with all our new forms of technology. This includes the over use of computers and cell phones. Those which are aimed at making our lives easier and more convenient are using vast amounts of resources. Audience Consideration: This essay is for my peers. I think that is it time for us to take a look at the things that are considered socially acceptable when it comes to environmentalism and the things that aren’t so widely accepted and really establish what the problem is.
A human induced global ecological crisis is occurring, threatening the stability of this earth and its inhabitants. The best path to address environmental issues both effectively and morally is a dilemma that raises concerns over which political values are needed to stop the deterioration of the natural environment. Climate change; depletion of resources; overpopulation; rising sea levels; pollution; extinction of species is just to mention a few of the damages that are occurring. The variety of environmental issues and who and how they affect people and other species is varied, however the nature of environmental issues has the potential to cause great devastation. The ecological crisis we face has been caused through anthropocentric behavior that is advantageous to humans, but whether or not anthropocentric attitudes can solve environmental issues effectively is up for debate. Ecologism in theory claims that in order for the ecological crisis to be dealt with absolutely, value and equality has to be placed in the natural world as well as for humans. This is contrasting to many of the dominant principles people in the contemporary world hold, which are more suited to the standards of environmentalism and less radical approaches to conserving the earth. I will argue in this essay that whilst ecologism could most effectively tackle environmental problems, the moral code of ecologism has practical and ethical defects that threaten the values and progress of anthropocentricism and liberal democracy.
The most obvious reason that the environment has moral significance is that damage to it affects humans. Supporters of a completely human-centered ethic claim that we should be concerned for the environment only as far as our actions would have a negative effect on other people. Nature has no intrinsic value; it is not good and desirable apart from its interaction with human beings. Destruction and pollution of the environment cannot be wrong unless it results in harm to other humans. This view has its roots in Western tradition, which declares that “human beings are the only morally important members of this world” (Singer p.268).
Two philosophies were developed in the past as part of the early environmental consciousness. Utilitarian conservation states that resources should be used for the greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time. Biocentric preservation, on the other hand, emphasizes the fundamental right of living organisms to exist and to pursue their own goods. Early schools of thought and rising concerns such as fossil fuel issues, air and water pollution and biodiversity loss led to modern environmentalism, the active participation in attempts to solve environmental pollution and resource problems. This term reinforces the notion that human beings have a responsibility to protect the environment. Similarly, global environmentalism is a concern or action to help solve global environmental problems.
Is it right that future generations, who have committed no crimes, be forced to live in a contaminated environment with freshwater depletion, polluted air, global warming and biodiversity reduction just because our present generation has caused the damage? Should our future children be ensured an ecologically healthy environment? I think they should. I strongly believe that protecting the environment is extremely important. We are all part of the environment; Earth is what we all share in common. It is our home and we are obliged to preserve it. As someone who is aware, who cares and who is concerned, I’d like to help you understand why protecting our environment is vital. I believe that protecting the environment is essential for healthy living, in creating a healthful environment for our future generation and last but not least, the Earth is our one and only home.
Many people assume that the environment is not in danger. They believe that as technology advances, we do not need to worry about renewing natural resources, recycling, and finding new ways to produce energy. They state that one person in the world does not make a large difference. In reality, each individual's contribution greatly affects our environment. Our natural resources are slowly disappearing, and we must work together to save them and the Earth from ruin.