Who owns nature? Sentience, environmental ethics and intervention in nature
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ef.345879Keywords:
animal ethics, ecologism, interests, animal welfare, intervention in nature, welfare biologyAbstract
Who owns nature? The question could be less important than reducing animal sufferings in nature. It does not matter if nature does not belong to anyone (or if it belongs to everybody) or if it belongs to someone, because in both cases there are limitations, linked with animal welfare, regarding what we should do in nature. Sentient beings have interests that we must take into account when designing environmental policies. Since neither ecosystems nor plants have interests, preserving nature is less important than reducing animal sufferings. The relevant moral issue is, therefore, knowing what happens to sentient animals in nature and developing policies to reduce their sufferings. This implies that we have the moral obligation of intervening in nature with the aim of reducing animal sufferings, so conservationist environmental policies defended by ecologists are morally unacceptable.
Downloads
References
Acton, H. (1963). Negative utilitarianism. Proceedings of the Aristotelian society. Supplementary Volumes, 37, 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1093/aristoteliansupp/37.1.83
Attfield, R. (2003). Environmental ethics. Polity.
Callicott, J. B. (1980). Animal liberation: a triangular affair. En R. Elliot (Ed.), Environmental ethics
(pp. 29-59). Oxford University Press.
Carruthers, P. (1992). La cuestión de los animales. Teoría de la moral aplicada. Cambridge University Press.
Cochrane, A. (2013). From human rights to sentient rights. Critical review of international social and political philosophy, 16(5), 655-675. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2012.691235
Dancy, J. (1991). Intuitionism. En P. Singer (Ed.), A companion to ethics (pp. 411-420). Blackwell. DeGrazia, D. (1996). Taking animals seriously. Mental life and moral status. Cambridge University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139172967
Donaldson, S. & Kymlicka, W. (2011). Zoopolis. A political theory of animal rights. Oxford
University Press.
Faria, C. & Horta, O. (2020). Welfare Biology. En B. Fischer (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Animal Ethics (pp. 455-466). Routledge.
Feinberg, J. (1974). The rights of animals and unborn generations. En W. T. Blackstone (Ed.), Philosophy and environmental crisis (pp. 43-68). The University of Georgia Press.
Frey, R. (1980). Interests and rights. The case against animals. Oxford University Press.
Frey, R. (1983). Rights, killing, & suffering. Moral vegetarianism and applied ethics. Basil Blackwell. Gensler, H. J. (1998). Ethics. A contemporary introduction. Routledge.
Horta, O. (2008). Términos básicos para el análisis del especismo. En M. González, J. Riechmann, J. Rodríguez & M. Tafalla (Coords.). Razonar y actuar en defensa de los animales (pp. 107-118). Los Libros de la Catarata.
Horta, O. (2010). Debunking the idyllic view of natural processes: population dynamics and suffering in the wild. Télos. Revista iberoamericana de estudios uitlitaristas, 17(1), 73-88.
Horta, O. (2017). Un paso adelante en defensa de los animales. Plaza y Valdés.
Jones, G., Cardinal, D. & Hayward, J. (2006). Moral philosophy. A guide to ethical theory.
Hodder Education.
Leopold, A. (2005). Una ética de la tierra. Los Libros de la Catarata.
Locke, J. (2017). Segundo tratado sobre el gobierno civil. Un ensayo acerca del verdadero origen, alcance y fin del gobierno civil (C. Mellizo, Trad.). Alianza.
Mill, J. S. (2008). Sobre la libertad (C. Rodríguez, Trad.). Tecnos.
Moore, G. E. (2002). El tema de la ética (A. García, Trad.). In C. Gómez (Ed.), Doce textos fundamentales de la ética del siglo XX (pp. 93-111). Alianza.
Philpott, D. (2016). Sovereignty. E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy https:// plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2016/entries/sovereignty/
Popper, K. (1945). La sociedad abierta y sus enemigos. Paidós.
Routley, R. (1973). Is there a need for a new, an environmental, ethic? Proceedings of the XVth world
congress of philosophy (pp. 205-210). Sofia Press. https://doi.org/10.5840/wcp151973136
Rowlands, M. (2002). Animals like us. Verso.
Rowlands, M. (2009). Animal rights. Moral theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan. https:// doi.org/10.1057/9780230245112
Ryder, R. (1998). Speciesism. In M. Bekoff (Ed.), Encyclopedia of animal rights and animal welfare (p. 320). Greenwood Press.
Singer, P. (1990). Liberación animal. Trotta.
Smart, N. (1958). Negative utilitarianism. Mind, 67(268), 542-543. https://doi.org/10.1093/
mind/LXVII.268.542
Smart, J. & B. Williams (Edis.) (1973). An outline of a system of utilitarian ethics. Utilitarianism for and against (pp. 3-74). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511840852.001
Smart, J. (1989). Negative utilitarianism. In F. D’Agostino & I. Jarvie (Eds.), Freedom and rationality. Essays in honor of John Watkins (pp. 35-46). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2380-5_3
Tanner, J. (2011). Moral status of animals from marginal cases. In B. Michael & S. Barbone (Eds.), Just the arguments. 100 of the most important arguments in western philosophy (pp. 263-4). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444344431.ch69
Taylor, P. (1981). The ethics of respect for nature. Environmental ethics, 3(3), 197-218. https:// doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics19813321
Torres, M. (2011). De lobos y ovejas: ¿les debemos algo a los animales salvajes? ÁGORA-papeles de filosofía, 30(2), 77-98.
Torres, M. (2015a). The case for intervention in nature on behalf of animals: a critical review of the main arguments against Intervention. Relations. Beyond anthropocentrism, 3(1), 33-49.
Torres, M. (2015b). El fracaso de los argumentos contra la intervención en la naturaleza. Actas I Congreso internacional de la Red Española de Filosofía XVIII (pp. 39-53). Publicacions de la Universitat de Valéncia.
Van Gulick, R. (2004). Consciousness. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness/.
Villamor, A. (2018). The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in nature. Revista de bioética y derecho, 42, 181-195.
Waldron, J. (2004). Property and ownership. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/property/.
Walker, A. (1974). Negative utilitarianism. Mind 83(331), 424-428. https://doi.org/10.1093/ mind/LXXXIII.331.424
Walker, J. (2000). Environmental ethics. Hodder & Stoughton.
Warburton, N. (1999). Filosofía básica. Cátedra.
Warburton, N. (2001). La caverna de Platón y otras delicias de la filosofía. Crítica.
Watkins, J. (1963). Negative utilitarianism. Proceedings of the aristotelian society. supplementary volumes, 37, 95-114.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Mikel Torres Aldave
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term "Work" shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher a nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoCommercia-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions: (a) Attribution: Other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;(b) Noncommercial: Other users (including Publisher) may not use this Work for commercial purposes;
4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal;
5. Authors are permitted, and Estudios de Filosofía promotes, to post online the preprint manuscript of the Work in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work is expected be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Estudios de Filosofía's assigned URL to the Article and its final published version in Estudios de Filosofía.
