Inquiry 26 (2):233 – 235 (1983)
|Abstract||Robert Elliot (Inquiry, Vol. 25 , No. 1) argues that the naturalness of a ?natural environment? is itself of value, and that a restored or ?artificial? environment, consequently, lacks a value that the original possessed. Against this it is argued that (i) Elliot has illicitly concluded that x has a valuable property F from the fact that someone values x because it is F, and (ii) it is unnecessary to seek environmental values the existence of which are independent of the emotional responses of rational agents|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Norbert Elliot (1999). Literature, Nature, and Other: Ecofeminist Critiques. Environmental Ethics 21 (2):217-219.
Avner de-Shalit (1992). Community and the Rights of Future Generations: A Reply to Robert Elliot. Journal of Applied Philosophy 9 (1):105-115.
Ingmar Persson (1997). Genetic Therapy, Person-Regarding Reasons and the Determination of Identity — a Reply to Robert Elliot. Bioethics 11 (2):161–169.
Elliot D. Cohen (2002). Pure Legal Advocates and Moral Agents Revisited: A Reply to Memory and Rose. Criminal Justice Ethics 21 (1):39-55.
Robert Elliot (1992). Intrinsic Value, Environmental Obligation and Naturalness. The Monist 75 (2):138-160.
Robert Elliot (1983). Ii. The Value of Wild Nature. Inquiry 26 (3):359 – 361.
Steven Vogel (2003). The Nature of Artifacts. Environmental Ethics 25 (2):149-168.
Robert Elliot (1994). Extinction, Restoration, Naturalness. Environmental Ethics 16 (2):135-144.
Robert Elliot (1982). Faking Nature. Inquiry 25 (1):81 – 93.
Added to index2009-03-05
Total downloads2 ( #234,650 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?