MNSES9100: Environmental Ethics.

Transcription

1 MNSES9100: Environmental Ethics

2 Case 1: Blind hens In modern egg production, factory hens tend to attack each other. Crowding results in feather pecking, comb damage, and cannibalism, This results in both suffering for the hens and economic loss for the farmers 2

3 Blind hens Under similar conditions, studies have shown that blind hens are much more passive, show less signs of stress and cease to attack each other. They have no problem finding food and water, and because of the reduced activity they require 25% less food intake, while egg production increases by 13%. Thus farmers can produce cheaper eggs for consumers with less suffering for the hens. A Norwegian company wishes to create a strain of blind hens through selective breeding and sell them for egg production. Should this be allowed? 3

4 4 Case 2: Wild Goats Human introduction of goats to an island in the 1960 s is threatening the abundance of a rare orchid. Without measures it is expected that the orchid will be extinct on the island within the next 10 years There is nowhere to move the goats. Should they be exterminated?

5 5 Case 3: GloFish GloFish are genetically modified fish that glow in the dark They were originally created for use in ecotoxicological studies, but are now marketed commerically in the US. Should they be permitted to be sold in Norway?

6 6 Case 4: Mountain Resort A company wishes to create a tourist resort at the above location on the edge of the Rondane National Park. Facilities will include hotels, cabins, a outdoor adventure theme park and shops. This will create 200 new jobs for the community, and bring in an expected 100 million kroner a year to the area. The increased number of tourists is predicted to be about 500,000 a year. Should the development be allowed?

7 What are we protecting and why? Pollution control Resource exploitation Nature conservation 7

8 Sources of Environmental Problems Limits to Resources Waste and Pollution Change in Global Systems Reduction in Biological Diversity Ariansen 8

9 What do environmental philosophers do? They question: How should we value the environment? Who or what has moral standing and why? They debate: Anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric views Intrinsic and extrinsic value 9

10 Definition of the Environment Japan The green fields The Dark Forest 10

11 Value and Moral Standing in Ethics Inherent or intrinsic value To have moral standing to count in moral reasoning - to count as an end in itself Instrumental or extrinsic value To have value as a means to an end to count because of some consequence for other moral entities 11

12 Three Theories of Environmental Ethics Anthropocentrism Biocentrism Ecocentrism Why do humans think they rule the world? 12

13 13

14 Western Christianity Christian-Jewish religion has been cited as the source of modern ecological destruction Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over all the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepth apon the earth (Genesis 1:26-30) 14 White, Science, 1967

15 15 Other Sources of Human Arrogance Patriarchal Society and Male Chauvinism Greeks: Hubris and Nemesis Technological Development (triumph over nature; the fortunate fall) Reductionism in Science (Age of Enlightenment) Ecology From communities to ecosystems Commerce, trade and capitalism (nature is resources to be exploited)

16 Ethical Theory Environmental Ethics Anthropocentrism Biocentrism Ecocentrism Overarching Ethical Theory Utilitarianism/Consequentialism Deontology/rights-based theories 16

17 Anthropocentrism Non-human species and the environment have value only in so much as they satisfy human interests extrinsic value (Frankena, Bookchin) Humans are the only entities that have moral standing Environmental effects matter only to the extent that they affect human interests Humans are the only valuers 17

18 Value and Moral Standing in Ethics Inherent or intrinsic value To have moral standing to count in moral reasoning - to count as an end in itself Instrumental or extrinsic value To have value as a means to an end to count because of some consequence for other moral entities Deontological ethics entities that do not have rights can be used as a means to an end ; Utilitarian ethics only the instrumental consequences for those entities having moral standing count in utility calculations 18

19 Utilitarianism/Consequentialism The greatest happiness of the greatest number (Jeremy Bentham ; John Stuart Mill ). Weighing positive and negative consequences Ethical significance depends on outcomes, not on intrinsic values of acts themselves 19 Valuing the environment?

20

21 Biocentrism (Animal Ethics) Utilitarian (Peter Singer) Ethical realm concerns all sentient creatures can they feel pain, do they suffer Kantian/deontological (Tom Regan) animal rights, duty based ethics. Animals are capable of experience, thus have similar claim to rights as humans 21

22 Deontology Rule based theory of ethics. e.g., Do not kill, lie, cheat, etc.; Treat persons as ends in themselves, never as means to an end (Immanuel Kant, ) Some actions are impermissible whatever the consequences (lying, killing, breaking promises) Emphasis on rights, duties and constraints 22

23 23 Bentham s question (1789) The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been witholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor. It may one day come to be recognized that the number of the legs, the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os sacrum, are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being to the same fate. What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason, or perhaps the faculty of discourse? But a full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant of a day, or a week, or even a month, old. But suppose they were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?

24 Biocentrism Who or what has moral status? rationality sentinence inherent or instrumental worth On what basis can we draw a moral distinction between humans and animals? or a heirarchy? 24

25 Regeringen har vedtatt å firedoble bjørnbestenden 25

26 Leave the flowers for others to enjoy! Let the flowers live! 26

27 27 Ecocentrism Ecosystems and/or their components have intrinsic or inherent value - value in themselves (Leopold, Callicott) Humans have no right to interfere with the richness and diversity of the ecosystem except to satisfy vital needs (Næss) Proponents of ecocentrism claim that both biotic and abiotic components of the ecosystem can have moral standing - holistic Disagree on the reasons for and solutions to environmental problems (human arrogance, male dominance, social and economic hierarchy) Arne Næss

28 Religious and Cultural Relevance Biocentric and ecocentric views reflected in many religions and cultures Need to recognise and preserve diversity 28

29 29 Historical evolution in the realm of moral and legal standing in Western Philosophy 2000 Ecosystem Species Primates Nation Gender Race 400 BC Citizens Tribe

30 Environment and Politics

31 Case 1: The Skeptical Environmentalist - measuring the real state of the world Published August 2001 Themes include Climate change. Alarmist predictions. No economic benefit of Kyoto protocol Biodiversity. No great threat to endangered species. No significant extinctions over those expected from evolution Chemical pollution grossly overrated and most controls a waste of money 31

32 32 Reaction Scientific American published a series of articles criticising the basis and conclusions of Lomborg ( Climate change too short sighted, erroneous accounting Biodiversity (E.O. Wilson) omitted important references, deliberately focused on extinction as a criteria rather than endangered or threatened species

33 The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty January 2003 found that accusations that Lomborg was guilty of scientific dishonesty could not be rejected General uproar from the scientific community even those who had disagreed with Lomborg Petitions from both natural and social scientists Danish government suspended funds from the committee Lifetd in 2004 after further petition from the scientific community 33

34 Ruling ( Objectively speaking, the publication of the work under consideration is deemed to fall within the concept of scientific dishonesty In view of the subjective requirements made in terms of intent or gross negligence, however, Bjørn Lomborg s publication cannot fall within the bounds of this characterisation. Conversely, the publication is deemed clearly contrary to the standards of good scientific practice 34 September 2007

35 Oil drilling in the Barents Sea Large untaped resources (Snøhvitfelt 3000 million cubic meters gass, Barents Sea 990 million Sm 3 oil) Up to 4100 new jobs Economic benefits for whole country 4 out of 5 inhabitants in Finmark support drilling March 2006 MD launched Integrated Management Plan 35

36 Opposition Vulnerability of ecosystem Uniqueness of ecosystem Impacts on fishing (43000 jobs) Impacts on tourism Cultural changes Risk of accidents Lack of knowledge 36

37 Precautionary Principle In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation. [Rio, 1992] 37

38 Difficulties There is no one definition of the precautionary principle What is meant by serious and irreversible? How to distinguish between possible consequences and probable consequences? How do the possible benefits weigh into the equation? 38 Does the PP help in the decision about drilling in Snøhvitfeldt?