Can traditional ethical theory meet the challenges of feminism, multiculturalism, and environmentalism?
Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Ethics 6 (4):383-405 (2002)
|Abstract||This paper aims to evaluate thechallenges posed to traditional ethical theoryby the ethics of feminism, multiculturalism,and environmentalism. I argue that JamesSterba, in his Three Challenges to Ethics,provides a distorted assessment by trying toassimilate feminism, multiculturalism, andenvironmentalism into traditional utilitarian,virtue, and Kantian/Rawlsian ethics – which hethus seeks to rescue from their alleged``biases.'''' In the cases of feminism andmulticulturalism, I provide an alternativeaccount on which these new critical discourseschallenge the whole paradigm or conception ofethical inquiry embodied in the tradition.They embrace different questions, goals, toolsof analysis, and wider audiences, typicallyignored or marginalized by traditionalethicists.I illustrate my argument through briefinterpretations of writers such as Susan Okin,Catharine Mackinnon, Sandra Bartky, JohnStoltenberg, Richard Wasserstrom, AnthonyAppiah, Charles Mills, Will Kymlicka, CharlesTaylor, and Martha Nussbaum. In many of thesecases, I suggest that they provide us with newways of being ethicists.In the case of environmentalism, I defend amore conservative and negative assessment.Sterba embraces authors such as Peter Singer,Tom Regan, and Paul Taylor in order to advancean environmentalist ethic of ``speciesequality/impartiality'''' and ``biocentricpluralism.'''' Here I argue that the traditionalKantian/Rawlsian ethics – which Sterba hopesto accommodate – actually provides compellingmoral reasons for rejecting his principles of``species impartiality'''' and biocentricpluralism. Moreover, Rawlsian ethics canprovide a more coherent, consistent, andplausible account of environmental issues thanSterba''s brand of environmental ethics. Iargue that in practice, his ethics concedeswhat it denies in theory – namely, the specialvalue which inheres in human beings.As such, environmental ethics, unlike feminismand multiculturalism, poses very little in theway of a credible challenge or alternative totraditional ethics.|
|Keywords||critical race theory environmentalism ethics feminism multiculturalism Rawlsian ethics traditional ethical theory|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jōrj Sakhar̲iya (2010). Alternatives Unincorporated: Earth Ethics From the Grassroots. Equinox Pub..
M. L. J. Wissenburg & Yoram Levy (eds.) (2004). Liberal Democracy and Environmentalism: The End of Environmentalism? Routledge.
Karyn Gurney Toerien, Can We Be Particularists About Environmental Ethics? : Assessing the Theory of Moral Particularism and its Practical Application in Applied Environmental Ethics.
Ben A. Minteer (ed.) (2009). Nature in Common?: Environmental Ethics and the Contested Foundations of Environmental Policy. Temple University Press.
Evelien Geerts, A Philosophical Analysis of the Problematical Feminist-Liberal Approaches to the Phenomenon of Multiculturalism. Down with Feminist Liberalism?
Karen J. Warren (1990). The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism. Environmental Ethics 12 (2):125-146.
Susan Moller Okin (1998). Feminism and Multiculturalism: Some Tensions. Ethics 108 (4):661-684.
Karen J. Warren (1987). Feminism and Ecology: Making Connections. Environmental Ethics 9 (1):3-20.
Evelien Geerts, An Analysis of Susan Moller Okin’s Problematic Approach to Multiculturalism. A Feminist Comprehensive Liberalism Gone Wrong.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #81,761 of 722,940 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,940 )
How can I increase my downloads?