Krebs, Angelika. “Discourse Ethics and Nature.” Environmental Values 6, no. 3 (1997): 269–79. doi:10.3197/096327197776679095.
The question this paper examines is whether or not discourse ethics is an environmentally attractive moral theory. The answer reached is: no. For firstly, nature has nothing to gain from the discourse ethical shift from monological moral reflection to discourse, as nature cannot partake in discourse. And secondly, nature (even sentient animal nature) has no socio-personal integrity, which, according to discourse ethics, it is the function of morality to protect. Discourse ethics is a thoroughly anthropocentric moral theory.
— Article abstract from The White Horse Press website
© 1997 The White Horse Press. All rights reserved. Republished with permission.
- Callicott, J. Baird."The Pragmatic Power and Promise of Theoretical Environmental Ethics: Forging a New Discourse." Environmental Values 11, no. 1 (2002): 3–25. doi:10.3197/096327102129340957.
- Kassiola, Joel J."Can Environmental Ethics 'Solve' Environmental Problems and Save the World? Yes, but First We Must Recognise the Essential Normative Nature of Environmental Problems." Environmental Values 12, no. 4 (2003): 489–514. doi:10.3197/096327103129341423.
- Zwart, Hub. "What is an Animal? A Philosophical Reflection on the Possibility of a Moral Relationship with Animals." Environmental Values 6, no. 4 (1997): 377–92. doi: 10.3197/096327197776679059.