A defense of environmental ethics: A reply to Janna Thompson

  • Nelson M
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Janna Thompson dismisses environmental ethics primarily because it does not meet her criteria for ethics: consistency, non-vacuity, and decidability. In place of a more expansive environmental ethic, she proposes to limit moral considerability to beings with a ''point of view.'' I contend, first, that a point-of-view centered ethic is unacceptable not only because it fails to meet the tests of her own and other criteria, but also because it is precisely the type of ethic that has contributed to our current environmental dilemmas. Second, I argue that the holistic, ecocentric land ethic of Aldo Leopold, as developed by J. Baird Callicott, an environmental ethic that Thompson never considers, nicely meets Thompson's criteria for acceptable ethics, and may indeed be the cure for our environmental woes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nelson, M. P. (1993). A defense of environmental ethics: A reply to Janna Thompson. Environmental Ethics, 15(3), 245–257.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free