Ethical Theory and Environment - II
Basic Thinking about Ethics
Reading Assignment:
Study Outline:
Thesis:
I.
Lecture #4
Environmental Ethics, Chapter 2, pp. 17-23
A fairly complete distillation of key points from Chapter 2. Modify and elaborate
where necessary, from your reading.
A sound ethical response to environmental controversies such as pesticide usage (Chapter 1
case example) or preservation of endangered species (Chapter 2 case) requires that we
understand some basic logic of ethical theory and then explore three major ethical theories:
Basic Logic of Ethical Theory: Three levels of attentiveness or understanding of the human
ethos B i.e. Acustom”, “habit”, or “character@ [recall “a livestock stall”]
A.
B.
C.
Descriptive – or What is (done, valued or believed); ordinary experience
1.
Descriptive ethics B empirical studies of what people/cultures do, value, or believe
B [ If empirical  factual claims ]
2.
Examples B fields of evolutionary biology, psychology, sociology or anthropology
Normative – or What ought to be (done, valued or believed)
1.
Normative ethics B Astepping back@ to examine why people do, value, or believe
B Result moral claims
2.
Benefit B realizing the limitations of our ethical and environmental consciousness
3.
Examples from history:
Philosophical Ethics – Evaluating the basis for AWhat ought to be@
1.
Philosophical ethics B Astepping back@ further to evaluate normative ethics and to
develop a comprehensive foundation for them
2.
Environmental ethics B write a definition here:
3.
Ethical theory B Aany attempt to provide systematic answers to philosophical questions
raised by descriptive or normative approaches to ethics@ for individual or society
II. Model – three levels illustrated
4.2
III.
Challenge – Uncovering our “ethical blindness”
A. Awareness – of a perspective based on simple acceptance of “what is”
– unchecked reliance on customary beliefs, attitudes, values
B. Admit -- to possible “ethical blindness” in acceptance of customary beliefs, attitudes, values
C. Submit – to allow our perspectives to be scrutinized objectively in an ethical context
IV.
Why Ethical Theory? (2.2)
A. Common language, concepts, and categories to facilitate understanding and discussion B e.g.
rights, duties, utility, common good
B. Awareness of our assumptions, patterns in our thinking; how to articulate them
C. Resource for evaluating ethical situations  guidance for recommendations
D. Critique of existing ethical theory  correction of error developing new theory
V.
Ethical Relativism B “a common challenge to philosophical ethics” – DesJardins in (2.3)
A. Claim: ethical judgements aren=t possible; instead, they are relative to individual opinion,
cultural values, religion, or customs (which can change)
B. Expressions: (Note: These are not factual claims)
1.
2.
AIt=s all a matter of opinion@
AWhose to say its right or wrong?@
C. Challenge B avoid Aintellectual laziness@
1.
Avoid Aintellectual laziness@ -- normative and philosophical ethics provide evidence
that
reasoning and objectivity are possible from careful reasoning
2.
Disagreement – doesn’t mean there is no right answer
3.
Recognize Differences in Intellectual Approaches -- in different disciplines:
e.g. AProofs@ are desired in math, but both science and ethics provide “rational and
objective judgements without proving” them.
4.
Logical Inconsistency -- If all truth claims are relative, then there cannot be objectivity
for rational persuasion and dialog; no means of identifying or defining Agood@ or
Abad@
VI. Application Exercise: In a certain region of southern U.S., there are alleged violations of pesticide
applications (e.g. excessive and repeated usage of certain formulations; and, applications of
Roundup® to vegetation in drainage ditches). Revisit and review the outline above and the
reading assignment in Chapter 2, and then identify and apply as many as possible of the ethical
points noted to develop your approach if assigned to change the practices of these farmers.