33 found
Sort by:
  1. Peter S. Wenz (2012). Take Back the Center: Progressive Taxation for a New Progressive Agenda. The Mit Press.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Peter S. Wenz (2010). Just Garbage. In Craig Hanks (ed.), Technology and Values: Essential Readings. Wiley-Blackwell.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Peter S. Wenz (2009). Beyond Red and Blue: How Twelve Political Philosophies Shape American Debates. The Mit Press.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Peter S. Wenz (2007). Against Cruelty to Animals. Social Theory and Practice 33 (1):127-150.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Peter S. Wenz (2003). Leopold's Novel: The Land Ethic in Barbara Kingsolver's Prodigal Summer. Ethics and the Environment 8 (2):106 - 125.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Peter S. Wenz (2003). Environmental Philosophy: Reason, Nature, and Human Concern. Environmental Ethics 25 (3):317-320.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Peter S. Wenz (2003). Leopold's Novel: The Land Ethic in Barbara Kingsolver's. Ethics and the Environment 8 (2).
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Wilson Carey McWilliams, Bob Pepperman Taylor, Bryan G. Norton, Robyn Eckersley, Joe Bowersox, J. Baird Callicott, Catriona Sandilands, John Barry, Andrew Light, Peter S. Wenz, Luis A. Vivanco, Tim Hayward, John O'Neill, Robert Paehlke, Timothy W. Luke, Robert Gottlieb & Charles T. Rubin (2002). Democracy and the Claims of Nature: Critical Perspectives for a New Century. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Peter S. Wenz (2002). Environmental Synergism. Environmental Ethics 24 (4):389-408.
    Some anthropocentrists, such as Bryan Norton, claim that intergenerational anthropocentrism provides the best rationale for protecting biodiversity. Some nonanthropocentrists, such as J. Baird Callicott and Eric Katz, disagree. In the present paper, I analyze different varieties of anthropocentrism, argue for adopting what is here called multicultural anthropocentrism, and then advance the following thesis of environmental synergism: combining multicultural anthropocentrism with nonanthropocentrism enables synergists to argue more cogently and effectively than either anthropocentrists or previous nonanthropocentrists for policies that both protect biodiversity (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Hussein M. Adam, Elizabeth Bell, Robert D. Bullard, Robert Melchior Figueroa, Clarice E. Gaylord, Segun Gbadegesin, R. J. A. Goodland, Howard McCurdy, Charles Mills, Kristin Shrader-Frechette, Peter S. Wenz & Daniel C. Wigley (2001). Faces of Environmental Racism: Confronting Issues of Global Justice. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Peter S. Wenz (2001). Environmental Ethics Today. OUP USA.
    The world's economy expands, food production increases, and technology links people as never before. But the human population grows, rainforests decline, species become extinct, climate change threatens extreme weather, cancer kills more than ever, and nearly a billion people starve as the gap between rich and poor widens. Environmental Ethics Today addresses these matters by exploring beliefs of fact and value guiding human interactions with nature. The style is journalistic, featuring actual controversies and individual stories, but the content is philosophically (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Peter S. Wenz (2000). Environmental Justice Through Improved Efficiency. Environmental Values 9 (2):173 - 188.
    Environmentalists can convince others to adopt nature-friendly policies through appeal to commonly-held values. Efficiency and justice are such values in industrial societies, but these values are often considered at odds with each other and with policies that preserve land and reduce pollution. The present paper analyses the notion of efficiency and argues that transportation policies that environmentalists favour – substitution of intercity rail and urban mass transit for most automotive forms of transport – are both efficient and just.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Peter S. Wenz (2000). Justice for Here and Now. Environmental Ethics 22 (3):311-314.
  14. Peter S. Wenz (2000). Peacemaking in Practice: A Response to Jim Sterba. Environmental Ethics 22 (4):441-442.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Peter S. Wenz (1999). [Book Review] Nature's Keeper. [REVIEW] Social Theory and Practice 25 (1):149-154.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Peter S. Wenz (1999). Pragmatism in Practice: The Efficiency of Sustainable Agriculture. Environmental Ethics 21 (4):391-410.
    Bryan Norton advocates using the perspectives and methods of American pragmatism in environmental philosophy. J. Baird Callicott criticizes Norton’s view as unproductive anti-philosophy. I find worth and deficiencies in both sides. On the one hand, I support the pragmatic approach, illustrating its use in an argument for sustainable agriculture. On the other hand, I take issue with Norton’s claim that pragmatists should confine themselves to anthrpocentric arguments. Here I agree with Callicott’s inclusion of nonanthropocentric consideration. However, I reject Callicott’s moral (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Peter S. Wenz (1999). Pragmatism in Practice. Environmental Ethics 21 (4):391-410.
    Bryan Norton advocates using the perspectives and methods of American pragmatism in environmental philosophy. J. Baird Callicott criticizes Norton’s view as unproductive anti-philosophy. I find worth and deficiencies in both sides. On the one hand, I support the pragmatic approach, illustrating its use in an argument for sustainable agriculture. On the other hand, I take issue with Norton’s claim that pragmatists should confine themselves to anthrpocentric arguments. Here I agree with Callicott’s inclusion of nonanthropocentric consideration. However, I reject Callicott’s moral (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Peter S. Wenz (1999). Wrongness, Wisdom, and Wilderness: Toward a Libertarian Theory of Ethics and the Environment. Environmental Ethics 21 (1):105-108.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Peter S. Wenz (1997). Caring for Creation. International Studies in Philosophy 29 (1):141-142.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Peter S. Wenz (1997). Environmental Pragmatism. Environmental Ethics 19 (3):327-330.
    Wenz reviews "Environmental Pragmatism" edited by Andrew Light and Eric Katz.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Peter S. Wenz (1993). Alternate Foundations for the Land Ethic: Biologism, Cognitivism, and Pragmatism. Topoi 12 (1):53-67.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Peter S. Wenz (1993). Contracts, Animals, and Ecosystems. Social Theory and Practice 19 (3):315-344.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Peter S. Wenz (1993). Minimal, Moderate, and Extreme Moral Pluralism. Environmental Ethics 15 (1):61-74.
    Concentrating on the views of Christopher Stone, who advocates moral pluralism, and J. Baird Callicott, who criticizes Stone’s views, I argue that the debate has been confused by a conflation of three different positions, here called minimal, moderate, and extreme moral pluralism. Minimal pluralism is uncontroversial because all known moral theories are minimally pluralistic. Extreme pluralism is defective in the ways that Callicott alleges and, moreover, is inconsistent with integrity in the moral life. However, moderate pluralism of the sort that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Peter S. Wenz (1989). Book Review:Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the Natural World. Holmes Rolston III. [REVIEW] Ethics 100 (1):195-.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Peter S. Wenz (1989). Concentric Circle Pluralism: A Response to Rolston. Between the Species 5 (3):9.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Peter S. Wenz (1989). Treating Animals Naturally. Between the Species 5 (1):3.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Peter S. Wenz (1986). Conservatism and Conservation. Philosophy 61 (238):503 - 512.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Peter S. Wenz (1986). The Critique of Berkeley's Empiricism In Orwell's 1984. Idealistic Studies 16 (2):133-152.
  29. Peter S. Wenz (1983). Book Review:Evolution, Morality and the Meaning of Life. Jeffrie G. Murphy. [REVIEW] Ethics 94 (1):140-.
  30. Peter S. Wenz (1982). Berkeley's Two Concepts of Impossibility: A Reply to Mckim. Journal of the History of Ideas 43.
    In my paper, "berkeley's christian neo-Platonism" ("journal of the history of ideas", July, 1976) I had maintained that george berkeley was a christian neo-Platonist who believed that abstract ideas exist in the mind of god, And that God used these ideas as archetypes during creation. Robert mckim commented that berkeley considered abstract ideas to be logical impossibilities, And therefore did not believe them to exist in god's mind. My reply is that berkeley employs two different concepts of impossibility for two (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Peter S. Wenz (1979). The Incompatibility of Act-Utilitarianism with Moral Integrity. Southern Journal of Philosophy 17 (4):547-553.
    Bernard williams' monograph in "utilitarianism: for and against" contains an argument that utilitarianism is incompatible with personal integrity. though his argument is fatally flawed, its conclusion is supported in the present paper, which argues that the act utilitarianism (au) defended by j j c smart in "utilitarianism: for and against" tends to deprive its adherents of moral integrity. after briefly reviewing smart's version of au, i recount williams' argument and carr's reply concerning a link between au and a loss of (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation