Lecture 7

Extensionism & Bio-centrism:

Taylor, “Respect for Nature”

1. Taylor's "Respect for Nature"
2. The basic concepts and approach
3. Taylor's three-step argument

Concepts and approach of Respect for Nature

• Interconnectedness
• The science of ecology
• Buddhism
• Biocentrism
• Teleology / teleological centre of a life

Teleology holds there is a final cause, a design, or central purpose inherent in all beings

• Biocentric egalitarianism

Taylor’s approach

The underlying ethical theory of Respect for Nature is virtue-ethics

Not only an application of ethical views to environment (so, not strictly an extension)

An attempt to develop a full-scale environmental philosophy

Argument structure:

The three-step argument

1. Belief system:

(The bio-centric outlook on nature)

A belief system that supports adopting ultimate moral attitude

A series of factual propositions (about the natural world)

2. Ultimate moral attitude:

(Respect for Nature)

Anyone who accepts the belief system will see that the only fitting attitude to take is this one

3. Rules of duty:

For those who accept Respect for Nature, certain rights and duties are binding

1. Belief system: ‘The bio-centric outlook on nature’

Humans are members of a larger natural community

Biosphere is a diverse and interconnected web of relationships

Each organism is conceived as a ‘teleological centre of life’, with a good all its own

Denial of human superiority (‘bio-centric egalitarianism’)

The assertion of human superiority is a groundless form of discrimination

The crucial step is iv.

2. Ultimate moral attitude: ‘Respect for Nature’

It’s an ultimate commitment

(not derived from some “higher” philosophy such as Christianity or utilitarianism)

It’s a moral commitment

(not a personal feeling toward nature; the attitude is “universalizable”)

3. Rules of duty

Nonmaleficence

(do no harm to any living organism)

Non-interference

(do not interfere with an organism’s freedom)

Fidelity

(do not deceive or betray wild animals)

Restitutive justice

(make restitution for the harms we commit)

• The fundamental duty is malificence : Do No Harm

Virtue ethics

Some examples:

• Aristotelian virtues
• Christian virtues
• Care ethics
• Professional ethics

Aristotelian virtues:

DEFICIT	MEAN	EXCESS
Cowardice	Courage	Foolhardiness
Laziness	Proper pride	Ambitiousness
Selfishness	Friendliness	Flattery
Inhibition	Temperance	Overindulgence

Christian virtues & vices:

Virtues	Vices
Faith Hope Charity Courage Justice Temperance	Pride Lust Avarice

“Care ethics”:

• Perceptiveness
• Imagination
• Love
• Creativity
• Sensitivity
• Commitment

Professional ethics

• Upper Canada Law Society
• Certified Accountancy
• Engineering Certification
• Student codes of ethics

Problems with Taylor’s argument:

Taylor’s bio-centrism is:

• Non-anthropocentric
• Biocentric
• Atomistic (deals with individual organisms)

Not necessarily ecosystems

Not necessarily species

Problem #1. The limitations of “atomism”

Effectively preserving ecosystems and species begins with preservation of individuals

What about ‘ecological wholes’:

Species (e.g. endangered species)

Ecosystems (Ottawa river valley, Great Lakes St-Laurence lowlands)

The thriving of a species or ecosystem is only partly connected to the thriving of all individual organisms

Problem #2. Is “biocentric egalitarianism” too strong?

What about insignificant creatures? Nuisance species?

lower organisms

“weeds”?

“Non-interference” might be unrealistic as a guiding philosophy

Lower organisms might not be our moral equals

Fifteen-minute essay

Take out a piece of lined paper

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

Question:

1. Explain in your own words Taylor’s idea of duties to the natural world, and state whether or not you consider it anthropocentric.