next up previous
Next: The problem of ``natural'' Up: Problems for an environmental Previous: Problems for an environmental

The problem of holism

Sober [4] points out one particularly important distinction to keep in mind: Often the things we'd like an environmental ethic to place a value on are whole species, communities, ecosystems, or landscapes not the individual organisms of which they are composed.11

Suggesting that we have a duty to a whole species, as opposed to its individual members, is analogous to the way we often suggest that we have a duty to a group--our department, the University, the profession, our country--that goes beyond our obligation to the individual members of that group. Moreover, we often recognize a conflict between our duty to individuals and our duty to a group, e.g., the conflict between individual liberties and national security.

So suggesting that we have a duty to protect biodiversity commits us to conserving species, but not necessarily the individual organisms of which they are composed. Suggesting that we have a duty to protect ecosystems might mean that we have a duty to prevent the extinction of the species of which it is composed, or it might mean that we have a duty to protect the processes that structure it. In neither case is the primary focus of concern on the welfare of individual organisms.


next up previous
Next: The problem of ``natural'' Up: Problems for an environmental Previous: Problems for an environmental
Kent Holsinger 2011-11-25