Environmental Ethics and the Anthropocentric and Biocentric Value Systems
Read each question-prompt, think through the issues raised and addressed, then review the recommended readings attached that relate to these questions and answer each question separately. The response for each question should be 400 words. The total for both should be 800.
Question 1
In Richard Routley's [he also uses the surname, "Sylvan"] article, "Is there a Need for a New, an Environmental, Ethic?" he uses the images of "the last man" and "the last people" [on Earth] to construct cases to use in his argument for why we DO need a new, environmental ethic. Explain and critique the strength or weakness of his "last man" and "last people" examples, in your personal opinion. Refer to source attached and site the source.
Question 2
Some Ethicists argue that there are ethical differences between human-centered (anthropocentric) value systems and life-centered (biocentric) value systems. Compare and contrast the anthropocentric and the biocentric views of land use and resource management. Refer to source attached and cite the source.
Environmental Ethics
Author’s Name
Institution of Affiliation
Course Name
Instructor’s Name
Date
Environmental Ethics
Question 1
Routley's article shows that individuals should be allowed to perform their desired actions as long as they do not cause harm to others and themselves. Failing to harm others (human beings) requires the suffering of non-humans affected. The last man example is negative as there is a recognizable fixed Western ethical system, showing that it is an unacceptable principle. The Western ethical view is inconsistent with an environmental ethic because it asserts that nature is man's dominion and that he can do whatever he wants (Routley, 1973). Since the identity of ethical systems is because of the identity of the fundamental principles, to search for a motive to scrap a key principle of any system involves looking for a reason to discard the system itself and a motive to scrap any family of such systems. Moreover, if the Western super ethic is supposed to be rejected due to the last man's work, then the last man has performed in logical breath to validate the importance of a new ethic.
Additionally, the last man, to some levels, works because what the last man did is incorrect and on environmental grounds. Conversely, how the last man works is all we know about the new ethic. It is clear that in a similar work, Routley purports that the ethic fails to commit a person to the view that natural things like trees possess rights, although he wishes this on the ground that is extraneous to how the last man example requires work.
The last man example can be extended to the last people instance. Assuming that the last people know, they are the last people; for example, they understand the radiation effects have hindered any possibility of reproduction, assuming the last people are many. These people humanely exterminate all wild animals, eliminate all fishes in the sea, put the land under intensive cultivation, and utilize the remaining part of the forest for plantation and quarries (Routley, 1973). They can argue that this is the best way possible to salvation, or they satisfy sensible requirements. It may be important to ensure the last people remain employed to avoid worrying about their impending extinction.
Based on the environmental ethic, the last people have misbehaved because they have destroyed every natural ecosystem, and with such disappearance, the world will be ugly and exhausted. Understanding the last people instance should be rejected because it does not mention any motivating bitterness toward the last people. Both the last man and last people cases demonstrate the freedom principle as insufficient, showing basic chauvinism to be insufficient. Thus, these individuals favor themselves, w...