Environmental Ethics 20 (4):361-376 (1998)
AbstractBiocentrists are criticized (1) for being biased in favor of the human species, (2) for basing their view on an ecology that is now widely challenged, and (3) for failing to reasonably distinguish the life that they claim has intrinsic value from the animate and inanimate things that they claim lack intrinsic value. In this paper, I show how biocentrism can be defended against these three criticisms, thus permitting biocentrists to justifiably appropriate the salutation, “Let the life force (or better the ethical demands of life) be with you.”
Similar books and articles
Descartes' Revenge Part II : The Supervenience Argument Strikes Back.Neal Judisch - 2009 - In Robert C. Koons & George Bealer (eds.), The Waning of Materialism: New Essays. Oxford University Press.
To Swat or Not to Swat: Pesky Flies, Environmental Ethics, and the Supererogatory.Mark A. Michael - 1996 - Environmental Ethics 18 (2):165-180.
The Empire Strikes Back: On Hardt and Negri.Maria Turchetto - 2003 - Historical Materialism 11 (1):23-36.
Franciscan Biocentrism and the Franciscan Tradition.John Mizzoni - 2008 - Ethics and the Environment 13 (1):pp. 121-134.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Ecological Justice and the Extinction Crisis: Giving Living Beings Their Due.Anna Wienhues - 2020 - Bristol, Vereinigtes Königreich: Bristol University Press.
Looking Through the Microscope: Microbes as a Challenge for Theorising Biocentrism Within Environmental Ethics.Anna Wienhues - 2022 - Endeavour 46 (1-2):100819.
The Moral Status of Nature : Reasons to Care for the Natural World.Lars Samuelsson - 2008 - Dissertation,
The Value of Nonhuman Nature: A Constitutive View.Roman Altshuler - 2014 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (3):469-485.
References found in this work
No references found.