Lecture 3

Definitions:

Moral agent:

“One faced with making a moral choice”

Moral standing:

“Those things whose needs and interests need to be taken into account in moral decision making”

Topics:

Selections from Genesis

• The ‘metaphysical’ story of creation
• The origin of ethics
• The origin of hierarchy

St. Thomas Aquinas –

• Refining the “natural hierarchy”
• Modernizing the Biblical argument

Lynn White – Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis

• Diagnosis of Christianity’s view of nature
• Technology as the culprit

Christianity’s creation story: Genesis

How do we approach this reading?

• A body of writings that give us insight into modern (Western) society and its view of animals and the natural world
• A series of arguments that raise questions for environmental ethics
• What questions are raised for environmental ethics?
• What things in the natural world have “value” according to this creation myth?
• What kind of value do things have?
• What differentiates humans from other living things

Creation of the Universe: the metaphysical story

• Life begins in the Garden of Eden
• Creation is an act by God, designed for human purposes, to fulfill humanity’s needs
• It is presented as the true ‘historical’ story

The origin of ethics: moral choice

• Moral choice (moral agency) is put in front of humanity by God
• Humans only are presented with this choice
• Humans only are members of the “moral universe”

Beginnings of the natural hierarchy…

• This story is subject to constant re-interpretation
• A prevailing message is that humans are placed by God in a position of pre-eminence
• Humanity is given a “special status”
• The operative concept used to express this relationship is “dominion”
• This concept expresses “power over…”, or “a controlling interest in…”
• Other possible concepts can be extracted
• Many believe that “stewardship” is also present here

Which concept (dominion vs. stewardship) best expresses what you see as the primary message of the book of Genesis?

St. Thomas Aquinas (1260)

The task:

• To spell out the biblical creation story in rational terms, while also preserving the central tenets of Christianity:
• The natural hierarchy
• A special status for humanity amid all of creation

Two key arguments:

• The natural hierarchy
• When we observe the natural world, we find an established order of beings…
• This established order, Aquinas contends, reflects a “natural law” that gives humans dominion over all of the non-human animals

But why?

• The intelligent should rule the brutes
• This is the essence of the natural hierarchy

Animals should be the slaves of human beings

Cruelty to animals:

But is it acceptable, within the logic of Christianity, to subject non-human animals to cruelty and abuse

(Consider the metaphor we’re working with à slavery)

• Should we give “charity” to animals?
• Should we treat animals with the same degree of respect that we should give to our fellow humans

Aquinas’s answer -- No:

Charity requires a special relationship with God – a form of friendship

• We do not have such relationships with non-human animals
• Friendship = love for friend, plus love for the good of the friend (happiness, success, love, freedom)
• Animals don’t possess the necessary characteristics to allow a relationship of this kind
• Animals don’t possess mental capacities such as language, abstract thinking, social awareness, and so forth
• Hence, we can’t be ‘friends’ with animals
• But, Aquinas provides two arguments to the effect that we should not be cruel toward animals:
• Living things are created by, hence ultimately belong to, God
• Cruelty to animals is tantamount to an insult to God
• Additionally, cruelty to animals “hardens the heart”, likely leading to cruelty toward fellow human beings
• Cruelty toward other people violates the social nature of humankind, which is deeply ingrained in the natural law
• So once again, Aquinas argues that cruelty to non-human animals is wrong, even though non-human animals occupy an inferior place in the natural hierarchy
• Note that Aquinas’s arguments against cruelty are rooted in indirect duties
• We have an obligation not to be cruel, but this is not an obligation to non-human animals
• …Non-human animals are not granted intrinsic value

“The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis”

• The diagnosis of Christianity’s view of nature
• The assertion of technology as the culprit
• White’s assertions of Christianity’s view of nature:
• Christianity is the “world’s most anthropocentric religion”
• The world is created for humanity’s benefit and rule
• Humanity is created “in God’s image”, thus deserves a status above other living things

White’s argument:

• When the ideas above increased in importance and joined with the “matrix” of Western ideals of science/technology, the predictable result was exploitation of the natural world
• We need an “alternative Christian view”:
• St. Francis advocated a “democracy of the world’s creatures”
• On this view, all living things are granted moral standing
• Therefore, the natural hierarchy partially disintegrates

Argument #1:

St. Francis held that all living things are kin to mankind, and are therefore deserving of charity

Living things are children of God in the same way as human beings

This is why they should be granted moral standing

Argument #2:

Because living things are children of God, they offer insights into the image and attributes of the divine…

To truly understand the divine, we must first learn to love our fellow creatures

Fifteen minute essay

• Take out a piece of lined paper
• Plan to write roughly ¾ of a page in essay form
• Begin with one clear proposition
• Add two or three clear propositions to explain and/or support it

Answer the following question:

1. Which concept (dominion vs. stewardship) best expresses what you see as the primary ‘environmental message’ in the book of Genesis?