ETH120 DQ

ETH120 DQ resps. 1A. For me, it’s hard to think of environmental ethics as a philosophy but I know most aspects of it have to be. Anyone interested in environmental science already possess some underlying ethics for the subject. I believe the relationship between the two almost have to coexist. It would be very out of sort to appreciate one without having an appreciation for the other, even if you’re unclear on what they stand for. Rolston does a very good job of explaining this; even before reading this section I knew that I cared for the environment and had some form of ethics for the way I treat it. After reading it, I now realize all the different ethical choices I make and practice which before, I would have never known how to explain them. Having good ethics to me, whether being environmental, or any aspect in life, has always meant having good, practical, moral standards. Ethics still seems to represent the same meaning to me after reading this but the term has just been drastically broadened to mean so much more, in a good way. I had never thought of ethics as being so down to the core of every little aspect of the environment, or anything else. It truly makes sense that every detail matters, from one ethical concern to the other. For example, when he talked about how some plant spices, like poison oak, are less desirable and cared for, but it was the environment around them that forced them to take on such characteristics and that there is more behind these less disable traits if you look into the evolution of things. So my relationship between what I’ve perversely known about ethics and environmental ethics has only become more enlightened, or clear. I have a feeling that there will much more of these types of feeling as the class goes on, but for now I’m beginning to enjoy how much ethics really matters for our environment. It has always been a struggle for land management agencies between use and preservation. Their goal is not to preserve land by enforcing non-use, but rather to enforce or promote “ethical land use.” But in the end, I believe no matter how much Governmental or political intervention exists over land use, as Rolston says, “persons ought to respect the integrity, the freedom of life in all its wildness,” interventions will not do it alone (Rolston, p. 525). This is because we are the only spices that have a choice to protect land and ecosystems. The problem is there is a common notion that today’s society is so far disconnected with the land that incentives are non-existent. Why should I preserve land that I never use? That is a common question that people ask themselves, and I agree with Ralston’s thought, that people will only be motivated if there is something at stake with places their connected to, like home. With no connection with nature or land, the motivation vanishes because we are mostly concerned with acts that pertain to self-interest (Rolston, p. 525). One thing he talks about is how nature and wild land is part of our global environment and shouldn’t be human habitat. That it should only be a place to visit and is unhuman to reside in. Yes that may be true for most, but it should be an environment that we are able and willing to reside in. Think of the appreciation that would develop if one took on the task of living here and making the land a necessity rather than a luxury. Land ethics would take on a whole meaning and would finally be unsurfaced for many people. I know this is not the most rational thought, but I would like us as humans, to be human whether visiting or residing in all forms of land. This would give them a form of residence rather than a constructed sense of place and as Rolston mentioned, an embodied form of residence is what brings out land ethics (Rolston, p. 525). Seane R. References Rolston, Holmes. "Environmental Ethics." Colorado State University. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2003, 1 Jan. 2003. Web. 6 Jan. 2015. <http://lamar.colostate.edu/~rolston/ee-blackwell-comp.pdf>. What do you think? 100 words substantive response. 1B. While reading the text for this week I began to realize that Environmental ethics encompasses more than just protecting the environment. It deals with the preservation of the future, the necessity to establish and carry out laws, and most importantly it needs authority. I realized through reading Aldo Leopold’s “The Land Ethic” that preservation is the only means of restoring our world. I currently work as an environmental technician, I know how much waste a small facilities like ours produces. The company I work for said we needed to go zero landfill. Their idea of preservation, much like that of Leopold, is the way of the future. Two years ago when the company made the statement to go zero landfill I am glad to say we have reached that goal. Through the rapid production of new technology the waste that used to go in to the landfill now is burnt for fuel and thus eliminates waste and generates something of use. Leopold, simply did not want to put a fence around an area and claim it was preserved. He wanted to dig deeper, make the area more efficient for wildlife. Since, the population of the world has grown exponentially, our environment has changed dramatically. Preserving it has come a long way since Leopold, however it still has a ways to go. Zacharia K. What do you think? 100 words substantive response.