After a semester’s hard work, I conclude my blog with this final post, summarizing what I have learned and declaring my own personal position as an environmental stakeholder and citizen. One of the overarching concepts we have studied has been Anthropocentrism and how it aligns with the three leading world views of Planetary Management, Stewardship, and Earth Wisdom. When applied unilaterally, “isms” like anthropocentrism and speciesism are viewed as negative for the environment, as they ignore other elements of our planet on which we depend and do not manage waste and resources in ways that will be beneficial long term. I am aligning my environmental ethic with the Earth Wisdom Worldview, as I believe in the interconnectedness and interdependence of the entire ecosystem. I also believe that to counteract the predictions of the 1992 and 2017 Unions of Concerned Scientists, conservation and sustainability efforts that preserve all life and processes on the planet will come from loving and respecting the processes of the environment. I was raised on the adage, “Treat others how you want to be treated”, and it has dictated many of my ethical principles throughout my life, and will continue to do so in this new environmental context.
With that in mind, my personal Earth Wisdom environmental ethic takes principles from Leopold’s Land Ethic, Paul Taylor’s Biocentrism, and most of all, Donald VanDeVeer’s Two Factor Egalitarianism. All three are based upon biological, ecological, and evolutionary principles, and I as an Anthropology major base many of my other world views upon those principles. They all stray from Anthropocentrism and Speciesism, but acknowledge different intelligences and capabilities across and within species which all have value in one way or another.
Where one ethic falls short, another one steps in and picks up the slack. I agree with Leopold’s love and respect for the environment, the interdependence of life as seen through the Land Pyramid and environmental citizenship, and the criticisms of human development as it has negatively effected our environment throughout the Anthropocene. Leopold falls short in methods of implementation and navigating conflicts of interest between lives with the same moral value. Enter VanDeVeer, whose two factor egalitarianism provides a system for solving conflicts of interest through determining types of conflicting interest and degrees of sentience. This two factor system still holds that those with sentience have value, but it includes a hierarchy. The hierarchy is good because it provides more order to the ethic, and it does not arrange the rank of value based upon the individual itself, but instead arranges value in the context of the conflict to figure out the solution. VanDeVeer does not necessitate vegetarianism and has attainable reformist/abolitionist policies. And lastly, I agree with some elements unique to Taylor’s biocentrism, mainly his five priority principles which utilize and enhance the effects of VanDeVeer’s categorizations of basic, serious, and superficial interests to add to a methodology for making environmental decisions.
Now, the tricky bit- Grading myself!
This semester has been a massive challenge and learning experience for me as I struggled to juggle a very large coursework load and unexpected personal problems which we discussed. Whoever says the last semester before you graduate is the hardest isn’t lying! That being said, I am pleased with my assignments from the first portion of the semester, and exceptionally pleased with my work in this second half that is being graded for the final. For my work, I would give myself the letter grade of A-. I am very confident in my writing and critical reading skills, and I have learned so much from this course. Most of the philosophers we studied fell short in suggesting implementation techniques of their ethics or divising weighing mechanisms for conflicts of interest. However, they all agreed that acting for environmental change, conservation, and sustainability means first educating oneself about the land, its uses, and different criterion for moral standing- all of which I believe that I have more than sufficiently accomplished this semester.
My workload in and out of class has been very taxing on my mental health this semester, and I happened to face several hiccups all at once. But, as I conclude my last semester, my GPA on a 4.0 scale in my majors and minors can demonstrate that I am usually a hard working and diligent student:
Philosophy minor (3.643: A to A- range)
Peace and justice studies minor (3.666: A)
Anthropology Major (3.747: A)
Thank you again for a jam-packed and insightful semester! I will continue to regularly reflect on these world views and do my best to align my actions with the ethics as an environmental citizen.
Environmental Ethics 
Leave a comment