Why Not Interfere With Nature?
- 141 Downloads
Advocates of an environmental ethic frequently claim that what makes an ethical theory truly and uniquely environmental is its commitment to the principle that environmental wholes such as species, ecosystems, and biotic communities are morally considerable. The prevailing view is that our primary duty towards these wholes is to respect their integrity, stability, and beauty, and that the best way to do this is to leave them alone, not interfere with them, and let nature follow its own course. But is that correct? Why should be refrain from interfering with nature?
There are two ways an environmentalist might try to justify an exceptionaless, prima facie principle of noninterference. First, she might claim that there is a contingent but universal connection between human interference and ecosystemic harm. There is also an epistemic variant of this view. When faced with a decision concerning whether to interfere with an ecosystem, there will always be overwhelming reasons for thinking that interference will be harmful, regardless of the specific circumstances. Send, there might be some conceptual connection between interference and harm to ecosystems. For example, if the well-being of an ecosystem is identified with its wildness, and wildness is understood as the absence of human intervention or manipulation, then any human interference necessarily detracts from an ecosystem's wildness and thereby has a detrimental effect on its well-being. In this paper I examine these justifications in detail and argue that none can support an exceptionaless principle of noninterference.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Botkin, Daniel. Discordant Harmonies: A New Ecology for the Twenty-first Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
- Cahen, Harley. Against the Moral Considerability of Ecosystems, Environmental Ethics 10 (1988).Google Scholar
- Callicott, J. Baird. The Conceptual Foundations of the Land Ethic, in J. Baird Callicott (ed.), In Defense of the Land Ethic. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1989, pp. 75–99.Google Scholar
- Callicott, J. Baird. The Wilderness Idea Revisited: The Sustainable Development Alternative, The Environmental Professional 13 (1991a), pp. 235–244.Google Scholar
- Callicott, J. Baird. That Good Old-Time Wildrness Religion, The Environmental Professional (1991b), pp. 378–379.Google Scholar
- Callicott, J. Baird. The Value of Ecosystemic Health, Environmental Values 4 (1995), pp. 345–361.Google Scholar
- Devall, Bill, and George Sessions. The Development of Natural Resources and the Integrity of Nature, Environmental Ethics 6 (1996), pp. 293–322.Google Scholar
- Elliott, Robert. Faking Nature, Inquiry 25 (1982), pp. 81–93.Google Scholar
- Gunn, Alastair. The Restoration of Species and Natural Environments, Environmental Ethics 13 (????), pp. 291–310.Google Scholar
- Hargrove, Eugene. Foundations of Environmnetal Ethics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989.Google Scholar
- Heffernan, James D. The Land Ethic: A Critical Appraisal, Environmental Ethics 4 (1982), pp. 235–247.Google Scholar
- Holland, Alan. The Use and Abuse of Ecological Concepts in Environmental Ethics, Biodiversity and Conservation 4 (1995), pp. 812–826.Google Scholar
- Jameison, Dale. Ecosystem Health: Some Preventive Medicine, Environmnetal Values 4 (1995), pp. 333–344.Google Scholar
- Katz, Eric. Nature As Subject. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 1997.Google Scholar
- Krieger, Marti H. What's Wrong With Plastic Trees?, Science 179 (1973), pp. 446–455.Google Scholar
- Leopold, Aldo. The Land Ethic, in A Sand County Almanac. NY: Ballantine Books, 1970, pp. 237–264.Google Scholar
- Loftin, Robert. The Medical Treatment of Wild Animals, Environmental Ethics 7 (1985), pp. 231–239.Google Scholar
- Mackie, J.L. The Cement of the Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980.Google Scholar
- Rodman, John. The Liberation of Nature?, Inquiry 20 (1977), pp. 83–145.Google Scholar
- Rolston, Holmes. Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the Natural World. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
- Rolston, Holmes. The Wilderness Idea Reaffirmed, The Environmental Professional 13 (1991), pp. 370–377.Google Scholar
- Rolston, Holmes. Ethical Responsibilities Toward Wildlife' Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association 200(5) (1992), pp. 618–622.Google Scholar
- Shrader-Frechette, Kristin. Practical Ecology and Foundations for Environmental Ethics, Journal of Philosophy XCII (1995), pp. 621–635.Google Scholar
- Westra, Laura. An Environmental Proposal for Ethics: The Principle of Integrity. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1994.Google Scholar
- White, Peter S., and Sue Bratton. After Preservation: Philosophical and Practical Problems of Change, Biological Conservation 18 (1980), pp. 241–255.Google Scholar
- Worster, Donald. Rivers of Empire. New York: Pantheon Books, 1985.Google Scholar
- Worster, Donald. The Ecology of Order and Chaos, Environmnetal History Review 14 (1990), pp. 1–18.Google Scholar