Cover of Environmental Ethics
>> Go to Current Issue

Environmental Ethics

Volume 41, Issue 4, Winter 2019
Inter-Continental Dialogues II

Table of Contents

Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:



Displaying: 1-10 of 10 documents


1. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

from the guest editor

2. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4
Ricardo Rozzi

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

features

3. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4
Luca Valera

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The aim of this paper is to focus on the idea of depth developed by Arne Næss, which is related both to his research methodology and some of its anthropological/cosmological implications. Far from being purely a psychological dimension (as argued by Warwick Fox), in Næss’s perspective, the subject of depth is a methodological and ontological issue that underpins and lays the framework for the deep ecology movement. We cannot interpret the question of “depth” without considering the “relational ontology” that he himself has developed in which the “ecological self” is viewed as a “relational union within the total field.” Based on this point of view, I propose that we are able to reinterpret the history of the deep ecology movement and its future, while rereading its politics, from the issue of depth.
4. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4
Eric Pommier

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The work of Hans Jonas’ has been largely overlooked by environmental philosophers. His Principle of Responsibility can help guide effective development of political institutions for environmental purposes. It is possible to use this principle to develop a deliberative and environmental conception of democracy. Some implications of the social contract framework of deliberative democracy show that Jonas’ conceptualization of responsibility leads to an environmental and deliberative conception of democracy by accommodating different citizens’ senses of the good in terms of an environmentally conceived global governance.
5. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4
Catherine Larrère

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
“Act so that the effects of your action are compatible with the permanence of genuine human life on Earth.” How can we understand Jonas’ “maxim”? Is it too anthropocentric to be of any interest for an environmental ethic? Is is too limited to survival to have a moral signification in a truly human ethic? One can argue first that it is not so much anti-Kantian than that it challenges the current prevailing “presentism” and obliges us to take into consideration not only future generations, but also the context in which one anticipates these future generations to be living. Therefore, we can distinguish two different interpretations of Jonas’ maxim: in a first stage, that of sustainable development, it was understood as taking into consideration not only the needs but also the rights of future generations; in a second stage, that of an Anthropocene and ecological transition, it means that making sense of humanity implies connecting human beings to the Earth and other living beings far from opposing them.
6. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4
Daniel Loewe Orcid-ID

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
A moral Kantian approach can be developed to deal with the nonidentity problem with regard to environmental intergenerationl justice—at least in cases of depletion or risky policy. Being a duty-oriented moral theory, this approach allows both that people coming into existence in a nonidentity situation can be glad to exist while simultaneously taking into account depletion or risky policy, to which their existence is causally related, as possibly being morally wrong because of a violation of moral duties.
7. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4
Hernán Neira

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Justifications for the environmental restoration of the Pumalín National Park, originally known as Pumalín Nature Sanctuary, in Chile can be analyzed from a philosophical and ethical point of view. The environmental stage to which the park should be restored is defined as a moral choice, rather than an ecological one, that is based on “climax” as an a priori value that supports and guides the main restoration actions carried out in the park. This climax is a pre-settling or pre-colonization condition. Defined philosophically, climax is both an ethical and political value. For these actions, the ecosystem’s health can be treated the same as that of a human’s health: each society defines the criteria and the acme of health, as well as the valid efforts to restore it.
8. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4
Andrea Nye

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Recent books promote Alexander Humboldt as an environmental hero, dismissing Humboldt’s partner in exploration, the botanist Aimé Bonpland, in a few inaccurate phrases: left Europe, went native somewhere in South America, did some farming. Bonpland’s writings and his forty years of regional development, botanical research, ethno-pharmacology, and environmental conservation in Argentina and Brazil present a better model for an environmental ethics than Humboldt’s climb to fame in Europe.

9. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

10. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 41 > Issue: 4

view |  rights & permissions | cited by