Muhammad Mohsin Javed(9408) Asif Ali Shar Ghulam Abbas(9173

)

Introduction
 Environmental ethics is the discipline in philosophy that

studies the moral relationship of human beings to the environment and its nonhuman contents.

 Although nature was the focus of much nineteenth and

twentieth century philosophy, contemporary environmental ethics only emerged as an academic discipline in the 1970s.

When industrial processes lead to destruction of resources.  Continuing with an excessive consumption of natural resources and their excessive use is resulting in their depletion. can a restored environment make up for the originally natural one?  Mining processes hamper the environment of certain areas. Human Beings are cutting down forests for making homes. . is it not the industry's responsibility to restore the depleted resources? Moreover. they may result in the disruption of plant and animal life in those areas.

industrial noise as well as high-intensity sonar.  Littering  Noise pollution.Most of the Human Activities lead to Environmental Pollution ACTIVITIES SUCH AS:  Air pollution. . manufacture and deployment  Water pollution. by the discharge of wastewater from commercial and industrial waste discharge of untreated domestic sewage. aircraft noise. which encompasses roadway noise.  Radioactive contamination such as nuclear power generation and nuclear weapons research. the release of chemicals and particulates into the atmosphere.

” . That end is man. Animals are not self-conscious and are there merely as a means to an end.KANTIAN APPROACH Immanuel Kant wrote: “So far as animals are concerned we have no direct moral duties to them.

KANTIAN APPROACH Nature's only value is determined on the basis of its capacity to serve human interests and needs. gratuitous and without a final purpose." . the natural world would be nothing but a "mere wasteland. and Kant goes so far as to tell us that in the absence of human interests.

but because we have duties toward other rational beings. make no moral claims upon us. . as they are irrational.KANTIAN APPROACH  He urges us to refrain from cruelty against animals not because we are bound by any direct duties to them.  Animals themselves.

 Kant does not believe that humans have duties to nature.KANTIAN APPROACH  Kant is an ego-centrist (i. having or regarding the self or the individual as the center of all things) who believes only humans have value and moral duties because they are the only rational creatures. ..  Kant.e. believes that only rational creatures have moral duties.

 Outside of the animals being useful to humans their extinction is not necessarily morally wrong.  If a species of animal goes extinct because of humans. humans no longer can use the animals for food. or use them for anything.KANTIAN APPROACH  In Kant's view. human moral duty is affected in that humans have to take care of nature because it will still affect humans. even though nature only has derived value. study the animals. .

he enjoyed over all the animals. and he now regarded as means and instruments to be used at will for the attainment of whatever ends he pleased. by his nature. “the pelt which you wear was given to you by nature not for your own use.Kant tells us that: When the human being first said to the sheep. but for mine” He took it from the sheep to wear it himself. he became aware of a exclusive right which. .

Asif Ali Shar 8964 .

was "the greatest good for the greatest number.  The principle of utilitarianism can be traced to the writings of Jeremy Bentham. a familiar one now. who lived in England during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.  His motto." .Utilitarianism  Utilitarianism offers a relatively straightforward method for deciding the morally right course of action for any particular situation we may find ourselves in.

 John Stuart Mill. .  For example. the principle of utilitarianism has been expanded and refined so that today there are many variations of the principle. a great 19th century utilitarian figure.Utilitarianism  Over the years. Bentham defined benefits and harms in terms of pleasure and pain. spoke of benefits and harms not in terms of pleasure and pain alone but in terms of the quality or intensity of such pleasure and pain.

politicians and philosophers have expressed concern that the world is facing an environmental catastrophe. .Utilitarianism  Today utilitarian's often describe benefits and harms in terms of the satisfaction of personal preferences or in purely economic terms of monetary benefits over monetary costs.  Many scientists.

but more of a family of theories with different variations. Some utilitarian approaches are more useful than others when applying them to environmental issues. including humans.  Since it is clear that destroying the environment will bring long-term harm to all species.Utilitarian Environmental Ethics  Utilitarianism is not a single theory. utilitarian's will weigh up the long-term harm against the short-term gain made from exploiting natural resources .

Utilitarian Environmental Ethics  Quantitative Utilitarianism looks at a situation and weighs up whether the moral course of action is the maximization of higher pleasures for present and future generations. but which is much used by power-boat enthusiasts and waterskiers. when in the Lake District there was a proposal to impose a 10mph speed limit on Windermere. a lake that lies within the National Park. for example. . whose activities contribute substantially to the local economy.  So. a designated area of peace and tranquility.

Utilitarian Environmental Ethics  Bentham would weigh up the amount of pleasure and pain of all those involved. Applying this approach to Windermere.  But how can this be weighed against the loss of calmness? . it is easy to assess the economic benefit of some of the elements in the situation: power boating brings money into the area.  Modern utilitarian's would use a cost–benefit analysis.

Utilitarian Environmental Ethics  Environmental economics would say that tranquility is also of value and it is simply a case of determining the strength of preferences for it – but is money an appropriate measure of environmental goods?  Should the fate of the environment be dependent on human preferences?  We never know the final result of our actions. . What may seem to be to the advantage of the environment now. may in the long term prove to be harmful.

then the case for preserving the environment is weak. the preference satisfaction of a cheap source of electricity would outweigh the preferences of the walkers and the white-water rafters. the qualitative utilitarian would consider the long-term interests of future generations.  For the preference utilitarian. .Utilitarian Environmental Ethics  Preference Utilitarianism considers that the moral course of action is the maximization of preference satisfaction for the current generation. However. Assuming that neglecting the environment has no major effect on the current generation. as well as those of the animals and plants.

GHULAM ABBAS .

EXAMPLES •Water conservation “What is this wastage. O Sa’ad?” “Is there wastage even in washing for prayer?” asked Sa’d. Qur’an regards the whole universe as Muslim because everything therein (except man. who may or may not become Muslim) has surrendered itself to God’s will.ISLAM ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT Qur’an regards not only nature but all universe as the creatures of God God does not love those who cause hurt and pain to believers. even if you are by a flowing river!” – (ibn majah) •Waste and over consumption but waste not by excess. ‘Yes. And he said. for God loves not the wasters(aA-quran) .

In one Hadith. God’s Messenger (PBUH) says: “Cleanliness is half of belief. It is because of this that throughout the ages cleanliness has been one of the Muslims’ most striking characteristics. Bukhari.IMPORTANCE OF CLEANLINESS. It thus makes a direct connection between belief and cleanliness.” The meaning of this is that when water is not available before worship. Islam considers cleanliness to be one of the fundamentals of belief.” (Muslim. 86 . God’s Messenger (PBUH) said: “The earth was made a place of worship and purification for me [and Muslims]. Tahara. earth may used for canonical ablutions (tayammum) in its place. 1) The earth is also considered by Islam to be a place of purification and worship of God.

reward will be recorded for him so long as it produces fruit. 415) • Whoever plants a tree.”(Majma' al-Zawaid. the Turkish poet of 13th century. 480 )  How profound are Yunus Emre’s. v.”(Musnad. God will give him reward to the extent of their fruit. v. words: “We love creatures for the sake of their Creator”! .IMPORTANCE OF TREES • Whoever plants trees.

Wastefulness and extravagance are prohibited by God: O children of Adam! Wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer. for God loves not the wasters. but waste not by excess. Surat Al-'A`rāf 7:31 BALANCED And the earth– we have spread it out wide. and caused life of every kind to grow on it in a balanced manner. and placed on it mountains firm. but this should not be arbitrary. eat and drink. and provided means of livelihood for you as well as for all beings whose sustenance does not depend upon you.WASTAGE Islam permits utilization of the environment.(Al-Hijir—15:19) .

from stars to planets. and we cannot misuse them. from trees to micro-organisms. Everything in this Universe. . everything in this universes is created by ALLAH(SWT) and they do not have any instrumental values. from human to animals. and as animals and nonhuman being do not have any conscious therefore Humans does not owe the anything. •In the Light of Islamic Perspective. nature only have instrumental value.CONCLUSION •ENVIRONMENT ETHICS in the light of Kantian Ethics.