Environmental Ethical Issues, Case Study Example

Environmental Ethics has proven to become one of the most widely discussed and theorized areas of politics and philosophical education in the United States.  Many important issues fall under the umbrella of environmental ethics, such as pollution issues, chemical dumping, oil drilling, environmental fire hazards and other behaviors that humans undertake that can be considered dangerous to our ecosystem.  This is a relatively new area of study and research that has become a strong foundation for our philosophical political behaviors by government and private organizations.  In order to properly appreciate the field of environmental ethics, it is important to examine its brief history, the foundations of arguments that are essential to ethical beliefs, and attempt to predict the future of the field.

During the infant stages of environmental ethics, most of its research was in the area of nature.  It was not until the late 1970s that bio-scientists and philosophers attempted to fuse the two studies together to examine the ethical concepts associated with the protection, or non-protection, of ecosystems.  It was upon this fusion that environmental ethics became an academic discipline and a highly researched and theorized field.  “The questioning and rethinking of the relationship of human beings with the natural environment over the last thirty years reflected an already widespread perception in the 1960s that the late twentieth century faced a “population time bomb” and a serious environmental crisis” (Palmer et al., 2008, par. 6).  This population time bomb essentially stated that the environment and ecosystems could not continue to sustain the human growth rate and usage or disposal of resources to support human lifestyles.  Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring was published in 1963 that brought widespread attention to critical issues such as detailing how pesticides caused harmful health and ecological problems (Palmer et al., 2008, par. 7).  This brief beginning stemmed a widespread analysis of environmental ethical issues, which has grown tremendously in the field today.  However, it is important to understand just a few of the most important ethical concepts that have been utilized for argumentation of issues in environmental ethics.

One of the most important concepts for understanding environmental ethics theory is a commonly referred to as utilitarianism.  “As the utilitarian focus is the balance of pleasure and pain as such, the question of to whom a pleasure or pain belongs is irrelevant to the calculation and assessment of the rightness or wrongness of [environmental] actions” (Palmer et al., 2008, par. 10).  In other words, utilitarianism has become known as choosing a behavior that provides the greatest good for the greatest number.  However, utilitarianism does not necessary imply that it is the greatest good for the greatest number of resources, animals, or ecosystems.  Many ethics professionals have applied an anthropocentric, or human-centered perspective to this concept.  Anthropocentric basically implies that there is an intrinsic value to human beings alone or philosophers and politicians are applying a stronger value to decisions that hold a larger value to human beings than to non-humans (Palmer et al., 2008, par. 3).  Even Aristotle stated in his work Politics that “nature has made all things specifically for the sake of man” (par. 3).  This concept is widely used for developing governmental legislation and business plans because of the many great benefits that can be retrieved from using environmental resources, destroying wetlands, or drilling oil in natural habitats regardless of the consideration of the impact on the ecosystems or the other creatures that live within them.

Today, the field of environmental ethics has shown a strong change in theory and thought processes from anthropocentric to what many philosophers are calling a “land ethic.”  Basically, this concept considers “that land is a community [and] is the basic concept of ecology, but that land is to be loved and respected [which] is an extension of ethics.”  Furthermore, philosophers have argued that “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” (Palmer et al., 2008, par. 2).  This new concept has primarily emerged in North America and limited parts of Europe, but has become commonly taught throughout most environmental ethics educational courses.  This concept is crucial to a further analysis and understanding of environmental ethics because it no longer focuses on the utilitarian anthropocentric perspective; instead, it concentrates on the overall good for every living and non-living thing that exists within the ecosystem or that uses environmental resources to function.  Most of today’s most current issues, such as oil drilling in a natural wildlife preserve in Alaska and political resource allocation to eliminating pollution and reducing global warming, stem from this new “land ethic” that professional bio-scientists and philosophers have discussed.

Without a doubt, there are many current topics that rely critically upon the field of environmental ethics in order to decide proper actions and non-actions by government legislation and private organizations.  Although the field has only recently become a legitimate academic discipline in the late 1970s, many of its philosophical concepts rely fundamentally upon classical texts and philosophers from centuries long ago.  Utilitarianism has multiple views, that are anthropocentric or involve a new “land ethic” that focuses on the benefits of each species of all types when making ecological decisions.  Environmental ethics provides a general guidance to political and business professionals in order to help assist making ethically sound decisions.  Ethics are based upon values and morals, and each person has a different set of each from varying backgrounds and religious beliefs.  It is important for environmental ethics professionals to rally all peoples into combining beliefs and prioritizing values in order to help prevent future damage of our ecosystems in the coming years.

References

Crowe, B. (1969). The Tragedy of the Commons Revisited. Retrieved on September 20, 2010, from Web site: http://dieoff.org/page95.htm

Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Retrieved on September 20, 2010, from Web site: http://dieoff.org/page95.htm

Palmer, C. (2008, January 03). Environmental Ethics. Retrieved on September 20, 2010, from Web site: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-environmental/

UNT.edu. (2002, June 24). History of environmental ethics for the novice. Retrieved on September 20, 2010, from Web site: http://www.cep.unt.edu/novice.html