Argument on the land ethic

Indeed, the richness of the language of virtues, and the emphasis on moral character, is sometimes cited as a reason for exploring a virtues-based approach to the complex and always-changing questions of sustainability and environmental care HillWensveenSandler Group B prefers natural reproduction on principle.

Synthetic substitutes for wood, leather, wool, and other natural land products suit Argument on the land ethic better than the originals. Not bad for a Wisconsin professor, who claimed he was just writing for himself and his friends, as he jotted down his sketches sipping coffee by "the shack," while the dawn crept across the meadow of his farm.

He goes on to show that the laws of health are non-moral but we break them to our own detriment. But not significantly so. For example, it forms the foundation for industrial farming; an increase in yield, which would increase the number of people able to receive goods from farmed land, is judged from this view to be a good action or approach.

Similarly, had Einstein pursued his other love, the violin, he might have been very good at it. Better land-uses may still arrest it in the less: For another example, a certain wild plant may have instrumental value because it provides the ingredients for some medicine or as an aesthetic object for human observers.

The interdependence of the forest and its constituent tree species, ground flora, and fauna is taken for granted. We can likewise think of a person who teaches others as having instrumental value for those who want to acquire knowledge. However, all these laws have been enacted only to protect the interests of other humans, and not to protect land.

For instance, human exploitation of nature may be seen as a manifestation and extension of the oppression of women, in that it is the result of associating nature with the female, which had been already inferiorized and oppressed by the male-dominating culture.

Temperatures changes are greater and winds are far stronger where forests have been cut, leading to higher climate control costs and greater damage from storms. While we all need some sort of rules and regulations to avoid absolute chaos, I feel that Hardin takes it to the extreme by suggesting socialistic type commons.

They are free to remove all trees, other plants, and animals, thus stripping the land of its ecosystem. Thus construed, it would prohibit clearing land to build homes, schools, or farms, and generally require a "hands-off" approach to nature that Leopold plainly did not favor.

Florida law already denies welfare benefits to individuals convicted of drug trafficking. Thus, an egalitarian-based land ethic could provide a strong argument for the preservation of soil fertility and water because it links land and water with the right to food, with the growth of human populations, and the decline of soil and water resources.

The farmer who clears the woods off a 75 percent slope, turns his cows into the clearing, and dumps its rainfall, rocks, and soil into the community creek, is still if otherwise decent a respected member of society. A land ethic of course cannot prevent the.

So there are disputes about whether the ethics of animal liberation is a proper branch of environmental ethics see Callicott, SagoffJamiesonCrisp and Varner It worries about a whole series of secondary forest Functions: In the section which follows I will offer two value premises which, I believe, when combined with the insights of ecological science and the holistic view of nature, provide strong justification for Leopold's "Land Ethic.

Temple University Press, Certainly there are many parallels between natural and artificial domains: It costs less to preserve land as is than to build complicated and energy intensive infrastructure to serve the same purpose.

What good does it provide one who sacrifices non discretionary income, food or personal wealth to provide for those who do not have a direct and immediate responsibility to that land? Those are true statements.

Land ethic

Accordingly, one cannot derive "oughts" from "is-es," values from facts, prescriptions from descriptions. Sartre held that values are grounded in nothing more than an individual's radical will. Gorke, The third point here is especially illuminating because it essentially says there will be some species not worth saving.

The hope is that selfish desires to preserve our own lives can be put to use protecting the natural world. Professor Weaver proposes that we use prairie flowers to reflocculate the wasting soils of the dust bowl; who knows for what purpose cranes and condors, otters and grizzlies may some day be used?

This deduction runs counter to our current philosophy, which assumes that because a small increase in density enriched human life, that an indefinite increase will enrich it indefinitely. Thus the ethics of the ownership and treatment of humans have changed greatly over the centuries.

Later, it becomes crucial as a component in one of our value premises. Other writers and theorists who hold this view include Wendell Berry b.

Unless somebody teaches love, there can be no ultimate protection to what is lusted after.

Environmental Ethics

Conservation became the preferred term for the more anthropocentric model of resource managementwhile the writing of Leopold and his inspiration, John Muirled to the development of environmentalism.

The disposal of property was then, as now, a matter of expediency, not of right and wrong. This same point would also seem to apply to political debates.An argument for ‘voluntary decency.’ “The Land Ethic” was the culmination of decades of thinking about conservation and, more broadly, about the.

The Land ethic regards an anthropocentric (i.e., human-centered) ethic as an analog to "kidney-centrism" -- ultimately self-defeating, because it is a point of view that is focused on the level of the component, rather than the level of the whole.

A land ethic is a philosophy or theoretical framework about how, ethically, humans should regard the land. The term was coined by Aldo Leopold (–) in his A Sand County Almanac (), a classic text of the environmental movement.

In The Land Ethic, Leopold attempts to explain why people are so selfish in the use of their land. Throughout history, people have been ruthlessly fighting each other for control of the most land possible, including forests, beaches, plains, fields, mountains and so on. Environmental ethics is the part of environmental philosophy which considers extending the traditional boundaries of ethics from solely called "The Land Ethic," in which Leopold explicitly claimed that the roots of the Andrew Brennan was an advocate of ecologic humanism (eco-humanism), the argument that all ontological entities.

The Land ethic regards an anthropocentric (i.e., human-centered) ethic as an analog to "kidney-centrism" -- ultimately self-defeating, because it is a point of view that is focused on the level of the component, rather than the level of the whole.

Argument on the land ethic
Rated 5/5 based on 38 review