Cases have been widely used in medical ethics and law. In both fields, numerous books and articles about cases have appeared, including book-length catalogs of cases. What I propose to do in this paper is to discuss whether environmental ethics should be case-based as in law and medicine.
The organization's rights to research topics,
to critique sources, and to publish research worldwide constitute
protected, free speech of the highest order and shall continue
unabated and uncensored. Students who are not sure how to
properly cite our work should ... Students who are
unclear as to whether or not using our term paper(s) as (a)
source(s) will be acceptable for credit ....are strongly urged to
consult withtheir instructor(s) before making (a) purchase(s) withus...
The Paper Store, Inc.
The basic strategy will be to present criticisms of the theoretical approaches, and then an exposition and defense of the case-based approach to ethics. There are three main theories in contemporary ethics: utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. All three theories have been developed both in general as normative theories, and in particular as they apply to animals and the environment. I will argue that the theories are not completely mistaken but that they are inadequate in scope. Each theory emphasizes important appeals that in some particular instances (cases) may be determinative. In other words, I will argue that a case-based approaches preserves what is best in the other approaches.
The main issue emerging from the debates over Utilitarianism (that is, theories like Peter Singer's and John Passmore's) is whether animals and the environment have the kind of value that would prohibit using them as mere means for human ends (or as "anthropocentric resources," as environmental ethicists prefer to say). Even if it is agreed that such usage should not be wanton and so must be justified, still at issue is whether the resulting ethic will be adequate to prohibit environmental abuse and cataclysm, and to guarantee long-term sustainability and biodiversity.
The long-term aim is to develop an approach to ethics that will help resolve contemporary issues regarding animals and the environment. In their classical formulations and as recently revised by animal and environmental ethicists, mainstream Kantian, utilitarian, and virtue theories have failed adequately to include either animals or the environment, or both. The result has been theoretical fragmentation and intractability, which in turn have contributed, at the practical level, to both public and private indecision, disagreement, and conflict. Immensely important are the practical issues; for instance, at the public level: the biologically unacceptable and perhaps cataclysmic current rate of species extinctions, the development or preservation of the few remaining wilderness areas, the global limitations on the sustainable distribution of the current standard of living in the developed nations, and the nonsustainability and abusiveness of today's technologically intense crop and animal farming. For individuals in their private lives, the choices include, for example: what foods to eat, what clothing to wear, modes of transportation, labor-intensive work and housing, controlling reproduction, and the distribution of basic and luxury goods. What is needed is an ethical approach that will peacefully resolve these and other quandaries, either by producing consensus or by explaining the rational and moral basis for the continuing disagreement.
Write a brief summary about the importance (internal and external) of community garden in University for the students. Then explain how would you begin this project. What professional skills would apply for this project? What would you learn that might aid you in the professional world from this project? Give specific examples. What would service learning project like this teach you about your environmental ethics? Why would you choose this project? Would this project change your environmental ethical perspective? If so, in what way? Relate this project to one or more of the ethical concepts from the below. Then finally explain you four motivations for regarding this project relating to environmental ethics. Explain with examples and how it relates to environmental ethics.
Environmental Ethics topics: (choose
John Muir: (spiritual) preservationist
Henry David Thoreau (Also a preservationist) and transcendentalism
Aldo Leopold: conservationist
You must provide citation to the source you use to get the information in MLA format. Make sure your paper is clear and thorough.
A five- to six-page Term Paper is required (this counts 1/3 of final grade), which must focus on some important question in Environmental Ethics. You may wish to consult with the instructor in selecting a topic. A list of possible topics will be distributed, however, you may suggest a topic which emerges from your own thinking. The paper may present an argument on some important Environmental issue, which draws on ethical principals and sources of moral value to be discussed in class. It should give an account of the major positions taken up on either side of an issue, including arguments in support of each side. Finally, the student should give her/his own position as a resolution of the issue, along with her/his reasons that support it. Alternatively, the paper may be a Synthesis of the reflections processed throughout the semester, and ending by summarizing the principles and conclusions drawn by the student as a result. The paper should be carefully written. Close attention must be paid to grammar, word usage and spelling. This will help to make the term paper clear to the reader, and good philosophical expression should be clear. (Obviously, plagiarism is unacceptable and will be treated in accordance with written University policy. Plagiarism is easily detected with many software programs.) Contributions to and participation in discussions during our weekly meetings will be factored into the balance of the grade (the final approximately 7%).
This paper providesa literature review of some of the main contributors to environmental ethics,their views, and the development of the deep ecology viewpoint.
Pluralistic casuistry makes the following responses to the central problems among animal and environmental ethicists. Using animals and the environment as resources is an important and necessary consequentialist moral appeal. We must use the environment if we are to have even basic necessities. Yet, consequence-based environmental ethics fails to include adequate constraints against short-term and local (non-holistic) profit-taking. In pluralistic casuistry, these constraints are provided by a pluralism of moral appeals, namely: long-term sustainability (including future generations of living individuals and species); psychological criteria (sentience, consciousness, self-consciousness, and rationality); the intrinsic value of both the living and non-living components of ecosystems; and the instrumental and intrinsic value of ecosystems as wholes.
The panel resulted from long-term collaborations with researchers from five continents (Africa, Asia, Latin America, Europe and North America), including Regional Representatives from ISEE, who presented at the a diversity of perspectives on environmental ethics and developed a more integrated platform for this international dialogue, including influential and foundational thinkers, institutions, and contrasting concepts and practices for environmental philosophy. As a follow up, panel members and other participants also held a workshop meeting on Tuesday, August 6th to discuss future plans for further developing this dialogue in this international collaborative network of environmental philosophy, and identified the need to more broadly communicate their regional approaches.
We have named this occasional papers series "," alluding to the millenary roots of environmental ethics in each of the cultural traditions in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North and South America, as well as the syncretic contemporary expressions in today’s cosmopolitan society, within and outside academia. The distinguished biologist at the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Economic Sustainable Development, , inaugurates this series with one of the strongest interdisciplinary branches of biology and philosophy: evolutionary ethics and the schools of environmental thought in Italy. Piergiacomo is one of the ISEE representatives for Italy, and since the 1990s he has built not only a rich conceptual framework but also an online platform () that fosters a dialogue on environmental philosophy. In his essay, “,” Pagano offers an overview on Italian environmental philosophy that introduces seminal authors and approaches that give an initial impulse for this new ISEE series on international environmental philosophies.