Saving the Last Person from Radical Scepticism: How to Justify Attributions of Intrinsic Value to Nature Without Intuition or Empirical Evidence

2Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Toby Svoboda (2011, 2015) argues that humans cannot ever justifiably attribute intrinsic value to nature because we can never have evidence that any part of non-human nature has intrinsic value. We argue that, at best, Svoboda’s position leaves us with uncertainty about whether there is intrinsic value in the non-human natural world. This uncertainty, however, together with reason to believe that at least some non-human natural entities would possess intrinsic value if anything does, leaves us in a position to acquire evidence that non-human nature has intrinsic value. We appeal to Michael Huemer’s (2013) Probabilistic Reasons Principle to argue that we have direct reasons to not act in ways destructive to non-human nature, even if this reason is defeasible. Hence, if having intrinsic value just is being a source of direct reasons, it also implies that non-human nature has intrinsic value.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pho, A., & Thompson, A. (2023). Saving the Last Person from Radical Scepticism: How to Justify Attributions of Intrinsic Value to Nature Without Intuition or Empirical Evidence. Environmental Values, 32(1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327122X16386102424010

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