Three Philosophies That Impact Environmental Concerns - Environmental Pragmatism, Ethical Relativism, and Ethical Pluralism
At the heart of many environmental issues are the philosophical and ethical standards that guide people in their responses to the environment. Whether or not a given individual will act responsibly toward the environment is a function of his feeling of responsibility for and commitment to environmental concerns. Three concepts stand out as governing philosophies that impact environmental concerns-environmental pragmatism, ethical relativism, and ethical pluralism.Environmental pragmatism is an offshoot of philosophical pragmatism that puts an environmental spin on it (Mintz). This concept is treated thoroughly in a collection of essays, Environmental Pragmatism, by Andrew Lig
Another way of expressing this concept is that "our ideas, theories, and worldviews should be examined and evaluated in the light of their impact on lived experience, according to how well they enable us to maneuver through experience successfully" (Reitan). Relativistic thinkers view ethical and moral values as applicable only within certain contexts or boundaries. Where environmental pragmatism suggests that the ends justify the means, this philosophy suggests that anything is acceptable in the appropriate context. In that respect, they are subjective rather than objective, predicating their acceptance of an alternative on whether the individual thinks the means or end are right or not, not comparing them against an absolute, immovable standard. Ethical pluralism, while it rejects the idea of a supreme moral principle, asserts that there are many acceptable moral principles and that these are "self-validating or self-justifying" (McGrath). Ethical or moral relativism asserts that ethical or moral propositions "do not reflect absolute and universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical, or personal circumstances" ("Moral Relativism"). Each philosophy can support environmental responsibility, but each will define it in a different way. The basic similarity between these three concepts is the lack of a belief in a supreme moral principle. The differences between them occur in their interpretation of the best means to achieve the end result. All three philosophies look not to any overarching ethical principle but to the desired result. Environmental pragmatism says that if something is good for the environment, it is good; ethical relativism says that whether something is good or not depends on the context; and ethical pluralism says that there are many good ways, not just one. In essence, this approach assumes that there are "many roads to Rome" rather than only one right answer. ht and Eric Katz, who define the concept as "a cluster of related and overlapping concepts" that can take one of four forms, that either examine the connection between pragmatism and environmental issues, articulate practical strategies for bridging gaps between environmental theorists and activists or theorists, investigate the overlap between environmental organizations and movements, or propound general arguments for moral pluralism in environmental normative theory (Mintz).
Common topics in this essay:
Relativism Relativistic,
Eric Katz,
,
Reitan Ethical,
environmental pragmatism,
ethical moral,
ethical pluralism,
supreme moral principle,
environmental issues,
context ethical pluralism,
pluralism environmental,
moral principle,
context ethical,
pragmatism environmental,
supreme moral,
moral relativism,
|
Acceptance Essays
