Environmental Ethics 11 (4):355-361 (1989)
Appeals to science as a help in constructing policy on complex issues often assume that science has relatively clear-cut, univocal answers. That is not so today in the environmentally crucial fields of ecology and evolutionary biology. The social role of science has been as a source of information to be used in the prediction and domination of nature. Its perspectives are finely honed for such purposes. However, other more conscientious perspectives are now appearing within science, and we provide an example here in rebuttal to the claim that there is no warrant from within ecology for ecosystem moral considerability
|Keywords||Applied Philosophy General Interest|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory.John Hadley - 2007 - Ethics and the Environment 12 (1):67-78.
Holism Vs. Reductionism: Do Ecosystem Ecology and Landscape Ecology Clarify the Debate?Donato Bergandi & Patrick Blandin - 1998 - Acta Biotheoretica 46 (3):185-206.
Ecosystem Ecology and Metaphysical Ecology: A Case Study.Karen J. Warren & Jim Cheney - 1993 - Environmental Ethics 15 (2):99-116.
Ecosystem Health as a Moral Requirement.Hugh Lehman - 2000 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 (3):305-317.
The Moral Considerability of Invasive Transgenic Animals.Benjamin Hale - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (4):337-366.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads27 ( #185,467 of 2,153,857 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #225,089 of 2,153,857 )
How can I increase my downloads?