Overview Define Environmental Ethics & Sustainability What is - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
overview
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Overview Define Environmental Ethics & Sustainability What is - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 06, 2023 400 likes •604 views

Overview Define Environmental Ethics & Sustainability What is Ethics? Relation between religion and environment Scripture references & environment Current events How you can make a difference 1

slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

Overview

  • Define Environmental Ethics & Sustainability
  • What is Ethics?
  • Relation between religion and environment
  • Scripture references & environment
  • Current events
  • How you can make a difference
slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

  • Environmental Ethics:
  • Anthropocentrism vs. Nonanthropocentrism
  • Animal vs. Environmental Ethics
  • Nonathropocentrism
  • A Pragmatist Alternative
slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

What is Environmental Ethics?

  • Environmental ethics- the discipline

that studies the moral relationship of human beings and also the value and moral status of the environment and its nonhuman contents

  • It considers the ethical relationship

between humans and the environment

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Why are Environmental Ethics Important?

  • Humans are slowly depleting all of our natural resources that
  • ther generations need for their future
  • Our world was created for us to live and thrive on and we are

slowly killing it

  • Sustainability for the environment is crucial so that we do not

destruct the world that God created

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

  • What is Ethics?
  • The scope of ethics is much broader than the realm of law.

Ethics extends to all our duties and obligations, virtues and vices, as we interact with each other – whether or not we should lie or steal, whether we should be charitable toward those less fortunate than ourselves, whether we should be forgiving, and how to resolve conflicts of interest when we have conflicting

  • bligations to different persons.
  • The general study of goodness.
  • The general study of right action.
  • Metaethics
  • Applied ethics
slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

  • The general study of goodness.
  • Minimally, two questions:
  • (1) What are the components of a good life?
  • (2) What sort of things are good in themselves?
  • Raises the issue of intrinsic value vs. instrumental value:
  • Intrinsic value: The worth objects have in their own right,

independent of their value to any other end.

  • Instrumental value: The worth objects have in fulfilling
  • ther ends.
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Ethical Theories

1. 1.

Subjective relativism Subjective relativism

2. 2.

Cultural relativism Cultural relativism

3. 3.

Divine command theory Divine command theory

4. 4.

Kantianism Kantianism

5. 5.

Act utilitarianism Act utilitarianism

6. 6.

Rule utilitarianism Rule utilitarianism

7. 7.

Social contract theory Social contract theory

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Relativism versus Objectivism: Relativism versus Objectivism: Where Where “The Good” “The Good” Exists Exists

  • 1. Subjective relativism
  • 1. Subjective relativism
  • 2. Cultural relativism
  • 2. Cultural relativism

“ “The good The good” is inside the mind ” is inside the mind

8

Relativism

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Relativism versus Objectivism: Relativism versus Objectivism: Where Where “The Good” “The Good” Exists Exists

  • 3. Divine command theory
  • 3. Divine command theory
  • 4. Kantianism
  • 4. Kantianism
  • 5. Act utilitarianism
  • 5. Act utilitarianism
  • 6. Rule utilitarianism
  • 6. Rule utilitarianism
  • 7. Social contract theory
  • 7. Social contract theory

“ “The Good The Good” is outside ” is outside

9

Objectivism

slide-10
SLIDE 10

The Workable Ethical Theories: Rational Theories 1. Subjective relativism 2. Cultural relativism 3. Divine command theory 4. Kantianism 5. Act utilitarianism 6. Rule utilitarianism 7. Social contract theory

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Subjective relativism

  • Relativism

– No universal norms of right and wrong – One person can say “X is right,” another can say “X is wrong,” and both can be right

  • Subjective relativism

– Each person decides right and wrong for himself or herself – “What’s right for you may not be right for me”

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Cultural relativism

  • What is “right” and “wrong” depends upon a

society’s actual moral guidelines

  • These guidelines vary from place to place and

from time to time

  • A particular action may be right in one society at
  • ne time and wrong in other society or at

another time

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Cultural relativism

Case for Case for

  • Different social contexts demand different moral

Different social contexts demand different moral guidelines guidelines

  • It is arrogant for one society to judge another

It is arrogant for one society to judge another

  • Morality is reflected in actual behavior

Morality is reflected in actual behavior

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Cultural relativism

Case against Case against

Because two societies

Because two societies do do have different moral views doesn’t mean they have different moral views doesn’t mean they

  • ught to
  • ught to have different views

have different views

Doesn’t explain how moral guidelines are determined Doesn’t explain how moral guidelines are determined

Doesn’t explain how guidelines evolve Doesn’t explain how guidelines evolve

Provides no way out for cultures in conflict Provides no way out for cultures in conflict

Because many practices are acceptable does not mean any cultural Because many practices are acceptable does not mean any cultural practice is acceptable (many/any fallacy) practice is acceptable (many/any fallacy)

Societies do, in fact, share certain core values Societies do, in fact, share certain core values

Only indirectly based on reason Only indirectly based on reason

Not a workable ethical theory Not a workable ethical theory

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15
  • 3. Divine command theory

(the virtue approach)

  • Good actions: those aligned with God’s will
  • Bad actions: those contrary to God’s will
  • Holy books reveal God’s will.
  • We should use holy books as moral decision-

making guides.

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Divine Command Theory

Case for Case for

We owe obedience to our Creator. We owe obedience to our Creator.

God is all-good and all-knowing. God is all-good and all-knowing.

God is the ultimate authority. God is the ultimate authority. Case against Case against

Different holy books disagree Different holy books disagree

Society is multicultural, secular Society is multicultural, secular

Some moral problems not addressed in scripture Some moral problems not addressed in scripture

 “

“The good” The good” ≠ “God” (equivalence fallacy) ≠ “God” (equivalence fallacy)

Based on obedience, not reason Based on obedience, not reason

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17
  • 4. Kantianism

(the rights approach)

  • Good will: the desire to do the right thing
  • Immanuel Kant: Only thing in the world good

without qualification is good will.

  • Reason should cultivate desire to do right thing.

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Kantianism

Case for Case for

Rational Rational

Produces universal moral guidelines Produces universal moral guidelines

Treats all persons as moral equals Treats all persons as moral equals

Workable ethical theory Workable ethical theory Case against Case against

Sometimes no rule adequately characterizes an action. Sometimes no rule adequately characterizes an action.

There is no way to resolve a conflict between rules. There is no way to resolve a conflict between rules.

Kantianism allows no exceptions to moral laws. Kantianism allows no exceptions to moral laws.

18