• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Book Proposed for the series
Understanding Movements in Modern Thought 
Understanding Environmental Philosophy Andrew Brennan and Y. S. Lo (La Trobe University, Australia)
1 Rationale
This book sets out in plain language the key ideas of environmental philosophy, tracing their connections with other areas of philosophy and some of their applications to environmental policy. Key ideas are also set in a wider cultural and historical context. Unlike many other works in the field, the book does not advocate a particular understanding of – or response to – ecological catastrophe, but engages in critical analysis of the full range of contemporary philosophical approaches. Because it is written by two authors with wide expertise not onlyin environmental ethics but also in other areas of philosophy, the book bridges in a uniqueand novel way, the gap between applied philosophy and central issues in contemporaryethical theory. None of the current texts on the market carries out this important bridgingtask.
2Summary
Key selling points of this book – 
•
more comprehensive than any other short introduction to environmental philosophycurrently on the market
•
written by two authors with international reputations for significant contributions inthe field
•
introduces cutting edge discussion and analysis and so is not simply a review of work in the field
3Contents
The book consists of an introduction and nine chapters written in an accessible style,covering both the major problems in the field and the theories of the leading figures. Whilemore comprehensive than other introductions to the field it also contains insights into thelatest lines of research in the subject. As a result, students will find the text not justinvaluable for introductory courses in environmental philosophy and ethics, but also aconcise guide to some of the topics at the centre of current research including new phenomenological and animistic thinking about the metaphysics of nature.. Unusually for the field, the book is written in a way that also introduces students carefully and precisely tokey ideas in philosophy and ethical theory. The combination of these features makes this aunique work with potentially wide market appeal.
 
4Contents summary
 Introduction
Here we explain the scope of the book and briefly outline the major guidingthemes – (i) concepts in environmental philosophy, (ii) key thinkers inenvironmental philosophy. We also show how arguments in environmental philosophy often model larger disputes in the philosophy. We specify some of thehistorical context for the rise of environmental philosophy and in doing sointroduce some basic concepts: different kinds of value; duties, rights,obligations; consequentialism, deontology and virtue ethics.1
 Future generations
The key question for this chapter is: do we have duties to future generations? Weconsider three popular answers – (a) utilitarian (we explore a ‘yes’ answer, and objections to it)(b) disappearing beneficiaries (ditto for ‘no’)(c) younger generation argument (ditto for ‘yes’)We show how and whey each answer faces challenge, and weigh up thesechallenges. Key theorists to be examined include: Bryan Norton, JannaThompson, Avner de Shalit. The topic of future generations is usually discussed interms of future humans. But why are animals and other natural things left aside?The ‘last person’ scenario (Val Plumwood and Richard Sylvan) provides one kindof argument for bringing non-humans into the circle of moral concern. In the nextchapter, we tackle the easiest case for an extension of our sympathies and moralcategories – the higher mammals, and other animals.2
 Animals
We now review some popular arguments for extending the circle of moralconsideration to include at least some animals and explore the distinction betweenmoral standing and legal standing. Next we study the vital question of 
anthropocentrism
– are humans the most intrinsically valuable things on earth?We survey Peter Singer’s anti-anthropocentric stance and provide a critical reviewof the utilitarian argument against strong anthropocentrism. Another form of anthropocentrism is considered – ‘speciesist’ anthropocentrism, and we indicatesome problems with the idea of ‘speciesism’. As one alternative to Singer’sconsequentialism, we look at the rights perspective of Tom Regan, noting thesimilarities and differences in how deontologists and consequentialists argue for their views. Can both parties give rights to animals? We consider whether thetwo positions are substantially different. In the discussion we cover important practical issues including animal experimentation and animal rights terrorism. Inthe light of our findings in regard to animals, the way is opened for a moregeneral exploration of extending moral care and concern to all living things.3
 Living things
Introducing the biocentric perspective, we look at strategies for conferring moralconsideration on natural things in general, not just animals. There are differentkinds of biocentrism – egalitarian and non-egalitarian. Paul Taylor’s influentialform of Kantian biocentrism – a complex of moral outlook, value attitudes andethical system – provides a model of how a complete moral perspective mightwork, and instructive lessons can be drawn from its failings. These include the problem of priorities – how to structure systems of moral rules and decide on
 
 principles to decide among them. We conclude by looking at how to deal in a fair and just manner with conflicts between humans and non-humans and at GaryVarner’s version of moral functionalism. While Taylor’s ethic is largely focusedon individual moral responsibility, there is also a need to consider our roles asmembers of larger communities, a task for the following chapter.4
Community
We turn next to the key issues about holism and communitarianism inenvironmental thought. For some theorists – notably J. B. Callicott – moralindividualism misses the point, and should be replaced by a kind of land-ethicalcommunitarianism, inspired by the thought of Aldo Leopold. We indicate thatthere are metaphysical issues about individualism, subjectivity and objectivitywhich also need to be considered. Although mentioned here, these metaphysicalmatters are dealt with more fully in chapter 8. Focusing on Callicott’s moralsystem, we show why his holism is distinct from his communitarianism, and howhe attacks agent-neutrality and consequentialism. We also assess Callicott’shostility to moral pluralism – an issue that leads us to consider the more generalcase of pluralism in moral theory. By now a further problem is starting to emerge:theorists have discussed different kinds of individuals, and different kinds of communities, all as candidates for having value and deserving respect. So whatare natural things, and which of the various kinds of individual and communityare worthy of respect?5
 Natural things
Many theorists have tried to extend the Kantian notions of freedom and self-determination to different ranges of natural things. By diagramming theconceptual space, we show vividly that various of these ‘expanded circles’ fail tocohere. In place of one set of expanding circles, there are several possible, anddifferent, ways of extending value to natural things. What, then, does ‘natural’mean in this context? We review Hume’s, Kant’s and Mill’s understanding of naturalness, and raise the intriguing questions (i) of whether natural things canhave dignity (ii) whether humans themselves are ‘natural’? We consider thearguments of Andrew Brennan, Eric Katz and Robert Elliot on intrinsic functionand their implications for copying and restoration projects, for individuals,species, landscapes and ecosystems. Does restored nature have as much value as pristine nature? To answer this question, we consider the work of Y.S. Lo and thecase of the Yellowstone wolf project. All these discussions, however, pose a prior question – about the source of moral value itself – which is worth separate study. 6
 Foundations
What have philosophers regarded as the sources of intrinsic value? We suggestthat answering this question uncovers some surprising and hidden foundations of contemporary thought. We trace the idea that value is an elite quality – asunderstood in older meritocratic ways of thinking – and ask whether there is aspecifically religious element (involving God’s grace) in the notion of absolute,unconditional value. We also inquire whether Kantian foundations for value provide a secular alternative to the religious ones. If so, then can Kant’s ideas beextended in a reasonable way to animals, living things, species and ecosystems?To complete the review of these foundational ideas, we look at subjectivism andobjectivism about value in the work of Callicott, Holmes Rolston and EugeneHargrove (the aesthetics of nature) and consider the extent to which there can be asynthesis between the subjective and objective accounts of value that are common
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...