Datasets:
DebateLabKIT
/
deepa2-corpus

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
text
stringlengths
0
1.71k
exist. Many of the ethical standards that we accept today can
be explained in these terms. Some are universal and can be
expected to be beneficial to the community in virtually any
conditions in which humans live. Obviously a society in which
members of the community are permitted to kill each other with
284
The Environment
impunity would not last long. Conversely, the parental virtues
of caring for children, and other virtues like honesty, or loyalty
to the group, would foster a stable and lasting community. Other
prohibitions may reflect specific conditions: the practice among
the Eskimo of killing elderly parents no longer able to fend for
themselves, is often cited as a necessary response to life in a
very harsh climate. No doubt the slow pace of changing climatic
conditions, or of migration to different regions, allowed time
for systems of ethics to make the necessary adjustment.
Now we face a new threat to our survival. The proliferation
of human beings, coupled with the by-products of economic
growth, is just as capable as the old threats of wiping out our
society - and every other society as well. No ethic has yet developed
to cope with this threat. Some ethical principles that
we do have are exactly the opposite of what we need. The
problem is that, as we have already seen, ethical principles
change slowly and the time we have left to develop a new
environmental ethic is short. Such an ethic would regard every
action that is harmful to the environment as ethically dubious,
and those that are unnecessarily harmful as plainly wrong. That
is the serious point behind my remark in the first chapter that
the moral issues raised by driving a car are more serious than
those raised by sexnal behaviour. An environmental ethic would
find virtue in saving and recycling resources, and vice in extravagance
and unnecessary consumption. To take just one example:
from the perspective of an environmental ethic, our
choice of recreation is not ethically neutral. At present we see
the choice between motor car racing or cycling, between water
skiing or windsurfing, as merely a matter of taste. Yet there is
an essential difference: motor car racing and water skiing require
the consumption of fossil fuels and the discharge of carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere. Cycling and windsurfing do not.
Once we take the need to preserve our environment seriously,
motor racing and water skiing will no more be an acceptable
form of entertainment than bear-baiting is today.
285
Practical Ethics
The broad outlines of a truly environmental ethic are easy to
discern. At its most fundamental level, such an ethic fosters
consideration for the interests of all sentient creatures, including
subsequent generations stretching into the far future. It is accompanied
by an aesthetic of appreciation for wild places and
unspoiled nature. At a more detailed level, applicable to the
lives of dwellers in cities and towns, it discourages large families.
(Here it forms a sharp contrast to some existing ethical beliefs
that are relics of an age in which the earth was far more lightly
populated; it also offers a counterweight to the implication of
the 'total' version of utilitarianism discussed in Chapter 4.) An
environmental ethic rejects the ideals of a materialist society in
which success is gauged by the number of consumer goods one
can accumulate. Instead it judges success in terms of the development
of one's abilities and the achievement of real fulfilment
and satisfaction. It promotes frugality, in so far as that is
necessary for minimising pollution and ensuring that everything
that can be re-used is re-used. Carelessly to throw out material
that can be recycled is a form of vandalism or the theft of our
common property in the resources of the world. Thus the various
'green consumer' guides and books about things we can
do to save our planet - recycling what we use and buying the
most environmentally friendly products available - are part of
the new ethic that is required. Even they may prove to be only
an interim solution, a stepping-stone to an ethic in which the
very idea of consuming unnecessary products is questioned.
Wind-surfing may be better than water-skiing, but if we keep
on buying new boards in order to be up to date with the latest
trends in board and sail designs, the difference is only marginal.
We must re-assess our notion of extravagance. In a world
under pressure, this concept is not confined to chauffeured limousines
and Dom Perignon champagne. Timber that has come
from a rainforest is extravagant, because the long-term value
of the rainforest is far greater than the uses to which the timber
is put. Disposable paper products are extravagant, because an-
286
The Environment
cient hardwood forests are being converted into wood-chips
and sold to paper manufacturers. 'Going for a drive in the country'
is an extravagant use of fossil fuels that contributes to the
greenhouse effect. During the Second World War, when petrol
was scarce, posters asked: 'Is your journey really necessary?'
The appeal to national solidarity against a visible and immediate
danger was highly effective. The danger to our environment is
less immediate and much harder to see, but the need to cut out
unnecessary journeys and other forms of unnecessary consumption
is just as great.
As far as food is concerned, the great extravagance is not
caviar or truffles, but beef, pork, and poultry. Some 38 per cent
of the world's grain crop is now fed to animals, as well as large
quantities of soybeans. There are three times as many domestic
animals on this planet as there are human beings. The combined
weight of the world's 1.28 billion cattle alone exceeds that of
the human population. While we look darkly at the number of
babies being born in poorer parts of the world, we ignore the
over-population of farm animals, to which we ourselves contribute.