Kantian Ethics and Environmental Policy Argument: Autonomy, Ecosystem Integrity, and Our Duties to Nature
Graduate studies at Western
Ethics and the Environment 3 (2):131 - 155 (1998)
|Abstract||In this essay I will argue that, preconceptions notwithstanding, Immanuel Kant does have an environmental ethics which uniquely contributes to two current debates in the field. First, he transcends the controversy between individualistic and holistic approaches to nature with a theory that considers humanity in terms of the autonomy of moral individuals and nature in terms of the integrity of functional wholes. Second, he diminishes the gulf between Conservationism and Preservationism. He does this by constructing an ideal-regarding conception of the former that values nature not as "merely" a thing to be used by human preferences and translated by markets, but as an essential component and prerequisite to the intrinsic autonomy of human beings. Simultaneously, he argues for a definition of preservation which places responsibility on humanity to harmonize moral agency with the functional integrity of natural systems. Here humanity and nature become the two unique and equally important components of what we might call the greater "Kantian ecosystem." In addition to the theoretical contributions of Kant's approach to our appreciation of the duties we owe to our natural environment, I will also suggest that Kantian Conservationism and Kantian Preservationism provide a sound moral basis for public policy arguments that wish to take the intrinsic value of humanity and nature into account. By requiring decision makers to consider citizens as ethical ends and nature as a functional end-in-itself, public choice becomes a process of restricting the use of the "kingdom of nature" to the essential requirements of the "kingdom of ends.".|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Bruce Morito (1999). Examining Ecosystem Integrity. Environmental Ethics 21 (1):59-73.
Lara Denis (1997). Kant's Ethics and Duties to Oneself. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):321–348.
Toby Svoboda (2012). Duties Regarding Nature: A Kantian Approach to Environmental Ethics. Kant Yearbook 4 (1):143-163.
Barbara Currier Bell (1981). Humanity in Nature: Toward a Fresh Approach. Environmental Ethics 3 (3):245-257.
Andrew T. Brei (2013). Rights & Nature. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (2):393-408.
Allen W. Wood (2008). Kantian Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
Lara Denis (1999). Kant on the Perfection of Others. Southern Journal of Philosophy 37 (1):25-41.
Alan R. Drengson (1980). Shifting Paradigms: From the Technocratic to the Person-Planetary. Environmental Ethics 2 (3):221-240.
Laura Westra (2009). Why Norton's Approach is Insufficient for Environmental Ethics. In Ben A. Minteer (ed.), Nature in Common?: Environmental Ethics and the Contested Foundations of Environmental Policy. Temple University Press.
Patrick Kain (2010). Duties Regarding Animals. In Lara Denis (ed.), Kant's Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press.
R. S. Peters (ed.) (1975). Nature and Conduct. St. Martin's Press.
Lara Denis (2008). Animality and Agency: A Kantian Approach to Abortion. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (1):117-37.
Robert S. Taylor (2005). Kantian Personal Autonomy. Political Theory 33 (5):602-628.
Ben A. Minteer, Elizabeth A. Corley & Robert E. Manning (2004). Environmental Ethics Beyond Principle? The Case for a Pragmatic Contextualism. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (2):131-156.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads3 ( #214,062 of 740,453 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,453 )
How can I increase my downloads?