The Monist 75 (2):119-137 (1992)

Authors
John O’Neill
University of Manchester
Abstract
To hold an environmental ethic is to hold that non-human beings and states of affairs in the natural world have intrinsic value. This seemingly straightforward claim has been the focus of much recent philosophical discussion of environmental issues. Its clarity is, however, illusory. The term ‘intrinsic value’ has a variety of senses and many arguments on environmental ethics suffer from a conflation of these different senses: specimen hunters for the fallacy of equivocation will find rich pickings in the area. This paper is largely the work of the underlabourer. I distinguish different senses of the concept of intrinsic value, and, relatedly, of the claim that non-human beings in the natural world have intrinsic value; I exhibit the logical relations between these claims and examine the distinct motivations for holding them. The paper is not however merely an exercise in conceptual underlabouring. It also defends one substantive thesis: that while it is the case that natural entities have intrinsic value in the strongest sense of the term, i.e., in the sense of value that exists independently of human valuations, such value does not as such entail any obligations on the part of human beings. The defender of nature’s intrinsic value still needs to show that such value contributes to the well-being of human agents.
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest  Philosophy of Mind  Philosophy of Science
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0026-9662
DOI 10.5840/monist19927527
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,834
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Intrinsic Vs. Extrinsic Value.Michael J. Zimmerman - 2019 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
A Distinction in Value: Intrinsic and for its Own Sake.Wlodek Rabinowicz & Toni Rønnow-Rasmussen - 2000 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (1):33–51.
Environmental Ethics.Andrew Brennan - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Luck and Interests.Nathan Ballantyne - 2012 - Synthese 185 (3):319-334.
The Ethics of De-Extinction.Shlomo Cohen - 2014 - NanoEthics 8 (2):165-178.

View all 71 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Consciousness: Varieties of Intrinsic Theory.Thomas Natsoulas - 1993 - Journal of Mind and Behavior 14 (2):107-32.
Intrinsic Vs. Extrinsic Value.Michael J. Zimmerman - 2019 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Hyperventilating About Intrinsic Value.Fred Feldman - 1998 - The Journal of Ethics 2 (4):339-354.
Pretabular Varieties of Modal Algebras.W. J. Blok - 1980 - Studia Logica 39 (2-3):101 - 124.
Rethinking Intrinsic Value.Shelly Kagan - 1998 - The Journal of Ethics 2 (4):277-297.
Intrinsic Value and the Argument From Regress.Julia Tanner - 2007 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 12 (2):313-322..
Why There is No Evidence for the Intrinsic Value of Non-Humans. Svoboda - 2011 - Ethics and the Environment 16 (2):25-36.
Is Intrinsic Value Conditional?Ben Bradley - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 107 (1):23 - 44.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-01-09

Total views
453 ( #16,039 of 2,426,000 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #40,492 of 2,426,000 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes