This week, we read about important philosophical perspectives as it concerns animals and the environment. Philosophers Christine Korsgaard and Bonnie Steinbock believe that animals do not share the same moral status as humans, though they are deserving of certain rights and considerations. Philosophers Peter Singer and Tom Regan believe that animals share the same moral status as human beings. Ecological feminists believe that no one is truly free, unless all beings are free, including non-human animals.
Two key perspectives in environmental ethics are anthropocentrism, meaning human-centered, and ecocentrism (or biocentrism), meaning nature-centered, where humans are seen as one part of the ecosystem. Two primary types of values associated with the environment are intrinsic (inherent worth) and instrumental (useful). For instance, some environmentalists believe that trees have intrinsic value, and as living things, deserve to be protected. Others view trees as having value because they are useful in some way. This activity aligns with module outcomes 1, 2 and 4.
Discussion Question
Prepare for your discussion by completing your readings and viewings. Then respond to the following:
- Which of the positions described above best represents your own and why? What constitutes freedom for non-human animals, specifically? For example, do zoos and circuses hold the same moral weight? Are hunting and meat-eating morally equivalent? How might your approach to animal rights reflect an anthropocentric or ecocentric viewpoint toward nature, in general, and why?
- Provide at least one facebook or SNS link that best represents an environmental or animal rights issue. Share a synopsis of the information from your chosen site
0 comments