Attfield – Environmental Ethics
Chapter 1. Origins
Environmental problems
- Nature is disappearing fast. For many centuries we have been changing it.
- Because of human impacts on the world of nature, many people call the present age, the
‘Anthropocene’, human impacts have become predominant
- There is no agreement whether this has started; deforestation/soil erosion are among ways
in which people have changed the natural world
- Plato was the earliest to be aware of soil erosion/deforestation; Aristotle depicted nature as
permanent unchanging
- The 20th century saw the rise of ecological science
- The new awareness of the unexpected side-effects of human impacts on the environment,
and how human action can imperil whole species and ecosystems, emboldened ethicist to
redirect their focus to environmental issues
The emergence of environmental ethics
- Nuclear war, new issues in medicine -> stage for the emergence in the early 1970s of
environmental philosophy and ethics
- Thought-experiment ‘the Last Man’ of Routly– a survivor of nuclear holocaust, eliminating
every remaining living being, what he does would be permissible for the traditional view, but
in most people’s intuitive judgement his action is to be condemned as wrong
o We should thus reject the human-interest-only stance
o Critics: extreme and exceptional circumstances
- Routley’s argument against anthropocentrism, non-human animals should be taken into
consideration human decision-making
- Routley: even in cases where it is clear that no human interests remain, most people still
consider it wrong to destroy other living beings.
- John Passmore – Man’s responsibility for Nature recognized two minority traditions. Humans
beings are stewards/trustees of the world of nature and responsible for its care. And in
religious version, answerable for their stewardship to God. In the second tradition, the role
of human beings is to enhance the world of nature by cooperating with
- Routley remained that Passmore’s minority views were fundamentally human-centred
themselves, because they fail to take into account non-human interests.
- But Routley had a narrow view of Western traditions
Naess and Deep ecology
- Philosopher Arne Naess ‘The shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. He
contrasted two kinds of ecological movement
o The shallow kind concerned with human interests of the next 50 years, in particular
with those of the people of developed countries
o The deep kind is concerned with the good of people of developing countries, with
the long-term future, and with non-human species, affirming their ‘equal right to live
and blossom’
o He was adhered to what he called biological egalitarianism – the equal entitlement
of all species to live their own way of life
- Naess advocacy of Deep Ecology movement involved support for a broad platform, including
biological diversity (preserving full range of species)
- For Naess, my true self is nog confined to my physical body, but extends to the whole of
nature. It is this greater Self that I am obliged to defend.
- The Deep Ecology platform advocated a significant reduction of human population. But it led
to followers to welcome catastrophes that decrease humans.
Rolston’s contribution
Chapter 1. Origins
Environmental problems
- Nature is disappearing fast. For many centuries we have been changing it.
- Because of human impacts on the world of nature, many people call the present age, the
‘Anthropocene’, human impacts have become predominant
- There is no agreement whether this has started; deforestation/soil erosion are among ways
in which people have changed the natural world
- Plato was the earliest to be aware of soil erosion/deforestation; Aristotle depicted nature as
permanent unchanging
- The 20th century saw the rise of ecological science
- The new awareness of the unexpected side-effects of human impacts on the environment,
and how human action can imperil whole species and ecosystems, emboldened ethicist to
redirect their focus to environmental issues
The emergence of environmental ethics
- Nuclear war, new issues in medicine -> stage for the emergence in the early 1970s of
environmental philosophy and ethics
- Thought-experiment ‘the Last Man’ of Routly– a survivor of nuclear holocaust, eliminating
every remaining living being, what he does would be permissible for the traditional view, but
in most people’s intuitive judgement his action is to be condemned as wrong
o We should thus reject the human-interest-only stance
o Critics: extreme and exceptional circumstances
- Routley’s argument against anthropocentrism, non-human animals should be taken into
consideration human decision-making
- Routley: even in cases where it is clear that no human interests remain, most people still
consider it wrong to destroy other living beings.
- John Passmore – Man’s responsibility for Nature recognized two minority traditions. Humans
beings are stewards/trustees of the world of nature and responsible for its care. And in
religious version, answerable for their stewardship to God. In the second tradition, the role
of human beings is to enhance the world of nature by cooperating with
- Routley remained that Passmore’s minority views were fundamentally human-centred
themselves, because they fail to take into account non-human interests.
- But Routley had a narrow view of Western traditions
Naess and Deep ecology
- Philosopher Arne Naess ‘The shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. He
contrasted two kinds of ecological movement
o The shallow kind concerned with human interests of the next 50 years, in particular
with those of the people of developed countries
o The deep kind is concerned with the good of people of developing countries, with
the long-term future, and with non-human species, affirming their ‘equal right to live
and blossom’
o He was adhered to what he called biological egalitarianism – the equal entitlement
of all species to live their own way of life
- Naess advocacy of Deep Ecology movement involved support for a broad platform, including
biological diversity (preserving full range of species)
- For Naess, my true self is nog confined to my physical body, but extends to the whole of
nature. It is this greater Self that I am obliged to defend.
- The Deep Ecology platform advocated a significant reduction of human population. But it led
to followers to welcome catastrophes that decrease humans.
Rolston’s contribution
