On the Reconciliation of Anthropocentric and Nonanthropocentric Environmental Ethics

Environmental Values 5 (4):349-361 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX


I argue that James Sterba's recent attempt to show that, despite their foundational axiological differences regarding the relative value of humans and members of nonhuman species, anthropocentrists and nonanthropocentrists would accept the exact same principles of environmental justice fails. The failure to reconcile the two positions is a product of an underestimation of the divergence that occurs at the level of general principles and practical policy as a result of the initial value commitments which characterise each position. The upshot of this is that, contrary to those who argue that environmental ethicists ought to move beyond the traditional anthropocentric -nonanthropocentric debate, the foundational debate about interspecific egalitarianism will continue to issue in substantial debates about environmental policy formation.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,213

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Contextualism and Norton's Convergence Hypothesis.Brian K. Steverson - 2009 - In Ben A. Minteer (ed.), Environmental Ethics. Temple University Press. pp. 135-150.
Environmental Ethics: An Aristotelian Approach.Eugene Schlossberger - 2001 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 8 (2):15-26.
Reconciliation Reaffirmed: A Reply to Steverson.James P. Sterba - 1996 - Environmental Values 5 (4):363 - 368.
Hume’s Knave and Nonanthropocentric Virtues.Paul Haught - 2010 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (1-2):129-43.


Added to PP

24 (#476,679)

6 months
1 (#414,449)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references