"Environmental Values, Anthropocentrism and Speciesism"
Onora O’Neill discusses environmental values and anthropocentrism and speciesism, with reference to obligation-based reasoning.
Onora O’Neill discusses environmental values and anthropocentrism and speciesism, with reference to obligation-based reasoning.
I.G. Simmons examines the basic thesis that environmental values must spring from the economic relations of human societies.
Mark A. Michael explains why the failure to insist on the distinction between different kinds of equality has led many to believe that egalitarianism generally has counter-intuitive implications, when in fact only one version of egalitarianism has this problem.
Anne K. Johnson tests the claims of cultural theory using the formation of climate change policies in Sweden, the United States, and Japan as case studies.
Ben A. Minteer criticises the tendency in environmental ethics to demonstrate a preference for foundationalist approaches in the theoretical justification of environmentalism. He argues for a more contextual, social, and pragmatic approach.
Holmes Rolston III discusses nature and development in an invited response to other articles in this issue of Environmental Values.
Carrie L. Hull discusses debates taking place among environmental scientists, providing a brief overview of the history of the formalist tendency in philosophy, and an illustration of the ways in which advocates of a strict laboratory methodology implicitly rely on this foundation.
Brian Baxter responds to Onora O’Neill’s argument that environmental ethics could and should be reformulated in terms of a search for the obligations held by moral agents towards each other, with respect to the non-human world.
Maurie J. Cohen introduces this special issue of Environmental Values.
Sheila Jasanoff reflects on the role of science in promoting convergent perceptions of risk across disparate political cultures.