Counter+arguments

= =

=C ounter-Argument of Holism= Philosophers have different ethic views when it come to the Environment. A Holist view of Ethics is a view that looks at the whole ecosystem or Biocentrism view instead of looking at it exclusively from a human point of view. Holism is the best perspective for the continuation of the earth as an ecosystem.

__Peter Singer__ Peter Singer thinks that because animals can feel pain, they deserve equal moral consideration as humans. Thus Singer's moral objects in nature appear limited to only animals that are vertebrates and self-conscious beings. Being able to feel pain is enough for singer to be given into consideration that animals that feel pain have a right to live without pain. (OK, but how is this a counter-argument against holism? Explain more here - perhaps with examples?)

__Gary Varner__

=
Varner thinks that Environment Ethics can not only be solved by a holistic view but by animal rights individuals who act to protect species. Vaner also address the idea of the mini ride which rights count to the individuals rather than the focus on the happiness of the whole. That also come in play with the worst of principle. This is when individuals have future project that they will be better for the future while someone else without future project would be unsuitable and this is where the worst of principle come in play. (ok, still a bit unclear though - ie, the difference and defintiions of miniride vs worse-off principles) Varner, along with other philosophers such as Tom Regan (accoridng to Regan or according to Varner's INTERPRETATION of Regan? : ) ) believe in Therapeutic hunting which regulates over population or under population with farm animals. While this idea seem good for the whole I can see some flaws (such as? what are the flaws?!) in that what about endanger and rare species that effect the whole ecosystem having a disturbance with the natural order of things.======

OK, you might also draw out the general points implied by Singer and perhaps Varner: that *some* individual beings count more, morally speaking, than holistic ecosystems. You might discuss moral patients and moral agents here as well (see the intro by Light) - in what meaningful sense can an ecosystem be considered a moral agent? or a moral patient? well, animals can be moral patients! that makes sense. but ecosystems?


 * Tom Regan
 * Albert Schweiter
 * Paul Taylor
 * Peter Singer
 * Robin Attfield
 * Gary Varner

= =





Home