Environmental Values 5 (4):363 - 368 (1996)
AbstractIn this reply to Brian Steverson's objections to my reconciliationist argument, I have clarified the requirements that follow from my principles of environmental justice. I have also clarified the notion of intrinsic value that I am endorsing and the grounds on which my claim of greater intrinsic value for humans rests
Similar books and articles
Reconciliation reaffirmed: A reply to Peffer.James P. Sterba - 1992 - Journal of Social Philosophy 23 (1):145-149.
Convergence and contextualism: Some clarifications and a reply to Steverson.Bryan G. Norton - 1997 - Environmental Ethics 19 (1):87-100.
On the Reconciliation of Anthropocentric and Nonanthropocentric Environmental Ethics.Brian K. Steverson - 1996 - Environmental Values 5 (4):349-361.
Convergence and contextualism: some clarifications and a reply to Steverson.Bryan G. Norton - 2009 - In Ben A. Minteer (ed.), Environmental Ethics. Temple University Press. pp. 87-100.
In Defence of Anthropomorphic Theism.Peter Forrest - 2011 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3 (1):105 - 122.
Choice-egalitarianism and the paradox of the baseline: A reply to Manor.Saul Smilansky - 2005 - Analysis 65 (4):333–337.
How to Make People Just: A Practical Reconciliation of Alternative Conceptions of Justice.James P. Sterba - 1988 - Rowman & Littlefield.
Reply to Griswold, Forgiveness: A Philosophical Exploration. [REVIEW]Michele Moody-Adams - 2010 - Philosophia 38 (3):429-437.
Political Reconciliation, the Rule of Law, and Genocide.Colleen Murphy - 2007 - The European Legacy 12 (7):853-865.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads