POST #12: Singer's Environmentalist Ethics
Topic: What is Singer’s environmentalist ethics? Detail his position here. And why does he say we should act ethical in the first place? Also, having read the appendix, what does it tell you about the “sensitive nature” of moral issues? Explain.
Singer’s Environmentalist Ethics
Singer begins the discussion of environmentalist ethics with Hebrew and Greek traditions: human beings are the centre of the moral universe. The Bible states that when God wanted to punish humans for their sins, He drowned almost every innocent animal on the earth; Aristotle said the existence of animals is for the sake of man; and Aquinas said “there is no possibility of sinning against non-human animals, or against the natural world” (Singer, 267).
Despite the traditions’ light regards to nature, Singer argues, the traditions do not rule out the concern for the preservation of nature as long as the concern is related to humans. Moreover, the scarcity of wilderness in the modern world gives it a new high value as well as a new drive for preservation. The appreciation of wilderness has never been higher than it is today, says Singer.
Singer’s argument for preservation is based on several reasons. The first one that he discusses is the wellbeing of future generations. Singer feels that natures have long-term value, and should not be exchanged for short-term benefits. “Wilderness is valued as something of immense beauty, as a reservoir of scientific knowledge still to be gained, for the recreational opportunities that it provides…” (Singer, 271). It is almost impossible to regain wilderness once it is lost. Therefore, Singer urges people to preserve nature for the sake of their children and grandchildren.
After illustrating the values of wilderness and also asking people to preserve these values for future generations, Singer asks people to think for the “sentient beings,” or the animals. Singer says there are undeniably values in the experiences of non-human beings; however, many people often disagree with this idea and view non-human animals as less significant.
Having pointed out the disagreement in the values of animals’ lives, Singer goes on to “extend ethics beyond sentient beings” and discusses the reverence for life. Then, Singer brings in the views of deep ecologists who wanted to preserve the integrity of the biosphere for its own sake. Here Singer emphasis again that “the value of preserving the remaining significant areas of wilderness greatly exceeds the economic values gained by its destruction” (Singer, 284).
In addition to acting morally and ethically on the issue of wilderness preservation, Singer expresses that people should act morally in the first place. Singer feels that as people become more aware of their situation in the world and more reflective about their purposes, they will acquire an ethical point of view that offers a meaning and purpose in life. This ethical point of view is the point of view of the universe that “transcend people’s inward-looking concerns,” and it will eventually return in the way that fulfills people’s ultimate self-interest, which is true happiness.
Having read the Appendix, I found Singer’s experiences in Germany a revelation of people’s sensitive natures on moral issues. Those of guilty conscience used methods of false propaganda to deter Singer from having speech and attending conferences and discussions, etc. With a history of Nazis, the Germans are still in the struggle to rise above their emotions associated with sensitive issues. Only after they overcome such emotions can they be rational and open-minded in these areas of topics.
Singer’s Environmentalist Ethics
Singer begins the discussion of environmentalist ethics with Hebrew and Greek traditions: human beings are the centre of the moral universe. The Bible states that when God wanted to punish humans for their sins, He drowned almost every innocent animal on the earth; Aristotle said the existence of animals is for the sake of man; and Aquinas said “there is no possibility of sinning against non-human animals, or against the natural world” (Singer, 267).
Despite the traditions’ light regards to nature, Singer argues, the traditions do not rule out the concern for the preservation of nature as long as the concern is related to humans. Moreover, the scarcity of wilderness in the modern world gives it a new high value as well as a new drive for preservation. The appreciation of wilderness has never been higher than it is today, says Singer.
Singer’s argument for preservation is based on several reasons. The first one that he discusses is the wellbeing of future generations. Singer feels that natures have long-term value, and should not be exchanged for short-term benefits. “Wilderness is valued as something of immense beauty, as a reservoir of scientific knowledge still to be gained, for the recreational opportunities that it provides…” (Singer, 271). It is almost impossible to regain wilderness once it is lost. Therefore, Singer urges people to preserve nature for the sake of their children and grandchildren.
After illustrating the values of wilderness and also asking people to preserve these values for future generations, Singer asks people to think for the “sentient beings,” or the animals. Singer says there are undeniably values in the experiences of non-human beings; however, many people often disagree with this idea and view non-human animals as less significant.
Having pointed out the disagreement in the values of animals’ lives, Singer goes on to “extend ethics beyond sentient beings” and discusses the reverence for life. Then, Singer brings in the views of deep ecologists who wanted to preserve the integrity of the biosphere for its own sake. Here Singer emphasis again that “the value of preserving the remaining significant areas of wilderness greatly exceeds the economic values gained by its destruction” (Singer, 284).
In addition to acting morally and ethically on the issue of wilderness preservation, Singer expresses that people should act morally in the first place. Singer feels that as people become more aware of their situation in the world and more reflective about their purposes, they will acquire an ethical point of view that offers a meaning and purpose in life. This ethical point of view is the point of view of the universe that “transcend people’s inward-looking concerns,” and it will eventually return in the way that fulfills people’s ultimate self-interest, which is true happiness.
Having read the Appendix, I found Singer’s experiences in Germany a revelation of people’s sensitive natures on moral issues. Those of guilty conscience used methods of false propaganda to deter Singer from having speech and attending conferences and discussions, etc. With a history of Nazis, the Germans are still in the struggle to rise above their emotions associated with sensitive issues. Only after they overcome such emotions can they be rational and open-minded in these areas of topics.
posted by Mavis Chao at 7:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home