Hello folks,
I am in agreement with the general tenor of Steven's commments, not
necessarily with some specifics, on David's BD/GD of specieism. The term,
imho, is so contrived, so much an manipulation of the term "species" and the
other terms such as "racism", "sexism", etc. that it has no real meaning for
folks concerned about environmental ethics. IMHO.
Then Steven said:
>"Finally as to David's definition of ee
>>Practical e-e is, in my opinion, largely a matter of
>>how we treat animals in the environment. "
>>
>
>I *strongly* disagree. Practical e-e is a matter of how we conduct
>ourselves, morally, within the context of ecosystems. If e-e is *only* an
>issue of how we treat animals, then the vast majority of environmental
>issues are not ethical issues. I don't see it that way at all.
>
Ray here:
I am in *complete* agreement with Steven on this point, and would go
further. Not only practical e-e, but also, and more importantly,
*theoretical* e-e should be looking at the issue in the complete context.
IMHO, the focus on how we treat animals in the environment does not *really*
address the animal treatment issue. One can't address complex issues of
human treatment of animals in isolation from the complex human treatment of
our environment. Animals, water, air, land, erosion, etc., and including
other humans, are all one. In my experience, an impact on one most likely
has implications for the rest of the system. The human use of human beings
is precursor to human exploitation of the rest of our environment.
Conversely, imho, human exploitation of the non-human world breeds a
contempt for our fellow humans - beginning with those humans who do not
look/act/believe as we, I, do.
IMHO, we need to start with questions pertaining to the nature of a "moral",
"honorable", person. It seems to me that the person who fits the highest
moral/ethical/honorable standards will respond to information about the
condition of other persons, the impacts of his/her actions on other persons,
in the same way as she/he would relate to the environment, of which both
human and non-human beings are a part.
The world/universe is a unity. We examine parts because we are not
competent to examine the whole at once. But we seem to have learned that
the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. So too, imho, human,
non-human and the rest of the environment.
Ray
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|