In a message dated 99-09-21 19:02:08 EDT, someone writes.
<< And I especially don't know what to do with this. If you are seriously
advocating some sort of alternative to "traditional private property" with
these remarks, then I would certainly enjoy hearing what you have to say.
But I don't see how "principled environmental ethics" and "traditional
private property" are necessarily mutually exclusive, as you *seem* to
imply in your last statement here. >>
L Dangutis responds.
"Principled environmental ethics" would be based on theories. (I.E Rawls,
Kant,
and Loch ect. ect.) Principles are generally an extention of ethical theory.
Property value is mutually exclusive I would think And I don't see where this
argument is taking us. Unless your making a proposal it would be
against some ethical theory/ value principle to destroy property with
species. For example Kantian theory may say it would be our out right duty
not to destroy this land because of an animal's right or endangerment. I
think it needs more elaboration
over all.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|