CHP 11 Who has rights #4 2011

CHP 11 Who has rights #4 2011 - Who has rights: people or...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Who has rights: people or Nature--Strum 4/20 1 Midterm HELP Session Today April 20 st 7-8:30 Center 212 Midterm #1 Friday April 22 nd In class (bring a pen) Study guide/vocab on WebCT This lecture will be on Midterm #2 Continuum of Values VALUE ARGUMENTS BIOPHILIA INSTRUMENTAL INTRINSIC WEAK ANTHROPOCENTRISM (NORTON) ANTHROPOCENTRIC NON- ANTHROPOGENIC ANTHROPOCENTRIC ECOCENTRIC BIOCENTRIC Attempts to argue for nature Intrinsic • Great Ape Project • Biophilia • Rolston’s • The Noah Principle • Conservation ethic Instrumental • Classic Economics • Green Economics • Millenium Ecosystem Assessment/IUCN Value of Biodiversity • Norton: pragmatics And why they don’t work: Madagascar case Natural Principles of Conservation (Rolston intrinsic value Æ rights) Derive natural principles of conservation INDEPENDENT of culture and humans Natural laws: Conserve your own organism Conserve biological identity Conserve biological community Conserve diversity and complexity Humans unique as only ethical species Conservation ethics is part of our human adaptation (Rolston con’t) • Maximize biological fitness • Natural outgrowth of biology • Morality in our genes = “transcendental” evolutionary morality to conserve nature Intrinsic Value(s) of Nature • Value of nature is in nature • Right to exist regardless • Because it exists it should be treated “morally” • Difficult to argue and implement • Does nature speak?
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Who has rights: people or Nature--Strum 4/20 2 I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees…and chimps…and Critique of Intrinsic Argument • How to extend rights to species (see ethics lit) • Why some and not others? (smallpox; disease) • What is the “good” of the species (ethics is human)? • Good propaganda but not coherent argument • Need human valuers for implementation (back to instrumental values) • Real world conservation is never based on “ethics” Instrumental value arguments The value of nature is only in the minds (actions) of humans •C u l t u r a l • Value to us • Economic: consume/use nature A “little” bit of Economics = Instrumental Point of View • Value = human willingness to pay/sell • Discounting the future • Environment is for free • Quality of life doesn’t count (except for lifestyle ) • Economic growth (Read Primack for more) Discounting the Future (the origins of our current economic crisis!!) Humans prefer immediate rewards Spend vs save Present is weighted over future = discount rate. Why: 1. You might be dead 2. The money might disappear
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 09/06/2011 for the course BIEB 176 taught by Professor Woodruff/strum during the Spring '08 term at UCSD.

Page1 / 7

CHP 11 Who has rights #4 2011 - Who has rights: people or...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online