Earthy Ethics
Antonia Felix
Friday, March 19, 2010
Climate change, like other big issues of our time, ignites discussions that go beyond facts and figures into the realm of ethics and morality. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, for example, recently described the funding of clean energy technology in developing countries as a “moral imperative” because those citizens are already the most vulnerable to the harmful effects of climate change.
Bringing “squishy” terms like “moral,” “right” and “wrong” into scientific or economic issues is risky in a society that worships only the rational and the bottom line, but it is happening. Those words are at the core of the relatively new discipline of environmental philosophy, which was the topic of the Emporia State University Philosophy Club’s “Socrates Café” gathering at the JavaCat one evening last week.
ESU Philosophy Professors Ed Emmer and Charles Brown, who teaches a course on environmental philosophy, joined about a dozen students in a conversation about whether or not non-human elements of nature have “intrinsic value;” the scope of human beings’ duties and obligations toward the environment, if any; and other topics relevant to the field. Not even a noisy coffee grinder could disrupt the lively conversation, and it tried—a lot.
Some students talked about the virtues of buying meat from a local supplier, which has a positive effect on the environment because it eliminates the use of gasoline/oil in transporting the goods (and is therefore ethical because the lack of emissions does not contribute to climate change). On the question of who or what has intrinsic value, one student said that “nature has an intrinsic right to exist. It’s a pompous attitude of humans that we have more right to exist.”
On the issue of what motivates our attitude toward protecting the environment, the talk turned to the economics of going green. “People wait for a financial incentive to recycle,” one student said, adding that Wichita uses sales tax revenue to fund its recycling program. “Even Republicans recycle in Wichita because it’s so easy,” he said. His comment touched on another topic of the evening—the political strategy of denigrating environmental issues in order to forestall clean-energy policies.
Limiting environmental decision-making to economic concerns has been a philosophical controversy since the call for a “land ethic” was first made by Aldo Leopold (1887–1948) in his classic book, A Sand County Almanac. In that book, Leopold—a scientist, scholar, writer, teacher and philosopher—was the first to articulate the role of ethics in environmentalism:
“All ethics . . . rest upon a singe premise: that the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts. His instincts prompt him to compete for his place in that community, but his ethics prompt him also to co-operate. . . . The land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land.”
Leopold’s view of right and wrong was just as clear: “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”
Leopold’s dream of a culture that embraces an ethic toward nature is coming to fruition, according to Dr. Brown. “There is a growing awareness and sensitivity to human-caused environmental harms,” he told me in an interview. “We see this in popular magazines and television programs devoted to environmental concerns. Ecuador has recently changed its constitution giving rights to ‘Mother Nature.’ Spain and other European countries are moving closer to giving rights to primates.”
Brown’s observation would make Leopold glad, proving that we have changed direction in a fundamental way. Writing in the 1940s, Leopold believed that the most serious roadblock to creating a land ethic was “the fact that our educational and economic system is headed away from, rather than toward, an intense consciousness of land.”
I spoke to one graduate of Brown’s environmental philosophy course who acknowledged that the class had “shifted his perspective” on environmental issues, especially the introduction to ecofeminism, which examines how our patriarchal culture has exploited and politically marginalized both women and nature. Phil Newlin, who graduated from ESU last year, told me that the realities and options outlined in ecofeminism “makes you reevaluate every position and pay closer attention to every decision.”
If young Mr. Newlin’s response is any indication, environmental philosophy is heading us toward the ethical consciousness Leopold envisioned. I have also seen this attitude in the Flint Hills ranchers I have met over the past several months, people who express the “love, respect, and admiration for land, and a high regard for its value” that Leopold believed was essential for the development of a land ethic. From the classroom to the prairie, we are fortunate to live in a place that offers rare opportunities to reconsider our place and responsibilities in the natural world.
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
Youtube UN Agenda 21 Sustainable Development......Good 10 minute video.
March 19, 2010 at 10:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv9OSx...
March 19, 2010 at 12:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
Youtube Dr. Stan Monteith 011910 4/4-Michael Shaw-Agenda 21
March 19, 2010 at 1:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
Youtube Educate Yourself: Agenda 21 & the Club of Rome
March 19, 2010 at 6:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
reddog (K. B. Thomas Jr.) says...
Go to In America, it's the government that says Oink Oink.....check out these earthy ethics.
March 19, 2010 at 7:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Interesting article and food for thought. Can't say the same about most of the comments.
March 20, 2010 at 6:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )