philosophy

Robert Elliot discusses anthropocentric ethics, concluding with a subjectivist account of intrinsic value.

J. M. Howarth outlines how phenomenological enquiry can reveal and criticise modernist assumptions, while traditional phenomenological notions might form a more eco-friendly framework for the value bases of interactions within nature.

Roger Crisp responds to Dale Jamieson’s views on animal liberation as environmental ethic.

Andrew Vincent examines the economic evaluation of the environment, concluding it is at odds with beliefs based upon objective and intrinsic values.

James P. Sterba offers clarifications to Brian Steverson’s objections to his original reconciliationist argument and notion of intrinsic value.

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.

This article examines allegedly Humean solutions by J. Baird Callicott to the is/ought dichotomy and the land ethic’s summary moral precept, concluding that neither the solution nor the argument is Humean or cogent.

In this paper, Robert L. Chapman discusses the importance of a place-based approach to standard virtue ethics, and argues that virtuous action, such as respect and gratitude, arises from deliberation from a position of being in and of the natural world.

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.

John Andrews discusses weak panpsychism, the view that mind-like qualities are widespread in nature, in relation to environmental ethics.