Environmental Ethics 13 (2):175-179 (1991)
|Abstract||In his recent essay on moral pluralism in environmental ethics, J. Baird Callicott exaggerates the advantages of monism, ignoring the environmentally unsound implications of Leopold’s holism. In addition, he fails to see that Leopold’s view requires the same kind of intellectual schitzophrenia for which he criticizes the version of moral pluralism advocated by Christopher D. Stone in Earth and Other Ethics. If itis plausible to say that holistic entities like ecosystems are directly morally considerable-and that is a very big if-it must be for a very different reason than is usually given for saying that individual human beings are directly morally considerable|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Robert B. Talisse (2011). Value Pluralism and Liberal Politics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (1):87-100.
Michael P. Nelson (2010). Teaching Holism in Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics 32 (1):33-49.
G. E. Varner (1985). The Schopenhauerian Challenge in Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics 7 (3):209-229.
Wim J. van der Steen (1995). The Demise of Monism and Pluralism in Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics 17 (2):209-220.
James P. Sterba (1995). From Biocentric Individualism to Biocentric Pluralism. Environmental Ethics 17 (2):191-207.
Jon N. Moline (1986). Aldo Leopold and the Moral Community. Environmental Ethics 8 (2):99-120.
J. Baird Callicott (1994). Moral Monism in Environmental Ethics Defended. Journal of Philosophical Research 19:51-60.
Andrew Light (1996). Callicott and Naess on Pluralism. Inquiry 39 (2):273 – 294.
J. Baird Callicott (1990). The Case Against Moral Pluralism. Environmental Ethics 12 (2):99-124.
Peter S. Wenz (1993). Minimal, Moderate, and Extreme Moral Pluralism. Environmental Ethics 15 (1):61-74.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #133,420 of 549,067 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,185 of 549,067 )
How can I increase my downloads?