Two major philosophical movements have sought to fundamentally rethink the relationship between humans and their environment(s): environmental ethics and enactivism. Surprisingly, they virtually never refer to or seek inspiration from each other. The goal of this analysis is to bridge the gap. Our main purpose, then, is to address, from the enactivist angle, the conceptual backbone of environmental ethics, namely the concept of intrinsic value. We argue that intrinsic value does indeed exist, yet its "intrinsicality" does not boil down to (...) being independent of the interests and needs of humans. Rather, it is brought forth by what we callshared enactionof an axiological domain. The latter is built upon such core posits of enactivism as autonomy, enaction, participatory sense-making as well as the most recent concept of loving as knowing proposed by Hanne De Jaegher. (shrink)

Abstract:This paper places the debate on intrinsic value taking place in environmental ethics within the context of the traditional controversy between realism and antirealism. It lays the groundwork for a new kind of realism with respect to intrinsic value. The latter does not claim that intrinsic value is real in the sense that it exists in an external, mind-independent reality; nor does it claim that that there are objective truthmakers of valuing statements. First, it aims at acts of valuing instead (...) of values. So, the question is whether there are cases in which something merits an act of intrinsic valuing. We propose that the core of realism with regard to intrinsic value is the endorsement of what might be is provisionally called the axiological rule of excluded middle; it says that for a given subject or group of subjects any entity either merits an act of intrinsic valuing or does not. However, for the proposed account to work, the paper also seeks a new account of meriting an act of valuing itself, endowing this specific relation with a new, more "embodied" sense. (shrink)