Final environmental ethics Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

Final environmental ethics - Research Paper Example In regards to this, ecology plays an important role in helping to understand the responsibility of human beings towards one another and the environment. In addition, it helps understand why these responsibilities are existent. There are a number of ecological disciplines that assist in achieving the goal of understanding the moral obligations of human beings. This paper will discuss the debate raised by Leopold’s suggestion: that the role and view of man should change from an anthropocentric one to – to one that allows hem to accord the natural world intrinsic ethical value. The paper will discuss the nature that man should play like a warden of the natural-world community, but not the conqueror, who can exploit the natural world for the selfish interests (Leopold, 1960, p. 220). Discussion Many scholars argue that human beings have a moral standing – which is superior to that of the natural world, including animals and the natural phenomena. However, the minimal extension of the moral nature of humans to cover the natural world causes real and difficult problems. These scholars, including Aldo Leopold hold that such an anthropocentric ethics base fails to go a long way, in offering the regard and the protection to be offered by the different natural community members. Therefore, they have offered and carried out studies, geared at the expansion of moral standing, to reach beyond the human community. Under this perspective, they claim that the selfish benefits of human beings can be addressed or eliminated through advocating, thus realization of better regard and treatment for the natural environment. In this regard, Radical ecology views moral standing as insufficient to resolve the environmental threats facing the natural balance to be attained. Radical ecologists argue that contrary to the shallow approach by moral standing, a wider philosophical perspective should be adapted, where human beings will shift their attitude towards the envi ronment as well as their understanding of reality of the balance between the different community members. In a bid to achieve this, it is necessary that human beings re- examine their place, so as to be able to comprehend the place they take and how they identify with the rest of the natural world, which is often abused, through uncontrolled abuse of the natural world. The utilitarian tradition of environmental ethics, on the other hand, holds that the maximum good and for the greatest number should be the goal, in defining the value and the importance to be given to the parts of the natural environment. The model, particularly points out two types of good to be considered, including the good which is held to be good for its own sake and the good which is good, because; it promotes other areas of good. Towards attaining this, preferences under watch are compared, where the preferences of different people or groups are conflicting. One of the major strengths of this model is that it is embedded in ordinary ways of reasoning and thinking (Des Jardins, 2001, p. 30-32; Abbey, 2002). These views are relatively divergent to those of deep ecology, which works on the basis of the basic principle that the living environment as a whole has similar rights to live and flourish. The endowment of rights to live and flourish, according to the model, is grounded upon the reality of man’s relationship with the natural environment and that between these different parts of the natu