Aquinas considered that by using our reason to reflect on our human nature we could discover our specific end purpose. Aquinas used the ideas of Aristotle and the Stoics as an underpinning for Natural Law saying- human beings have an essential rational nature given by God in order for us to live and flourish. Aristotle said even without knowledge of god, reason can discover the laws that lead to human flourishing. The Stoics said Natural Laws are universal and unchangeable and should be used to judge of particular societies. We use this is help us choose the right moral action is situations.
Despite the differences in our individual environmental ethic we can all easily understand that when it comes down to it we deeply rely on the world around us. Yet we have still chosen to disregard concepts concerning the longevity of humanity. Overpopulation, exploitation of the third world, consumerism, unregulated growth, stewardship, language and education reform are all part of the social and environmental commentary our authors provide us with. Georg E. Tinker a Native American theologian uses his unique perspective to inquire about religions effects on our environment in “An American Indian Theological Response to Eco-Justice”. Similarly Cathryn Bailey comments on western societies view of animal ethics as a looking glass into societies views of life other than that of humans.
In other words, it means that there is ‘rule of jungle’ and in the rule of jungle, everyone takes care of themselves. Also justice and injustice; right and wrong do not have any meaning to people in the state of nature. Thus, in order to escape from this, people make the contract. According to this contract, people should trust each other. In the contract, people give up their rights and transfer their rights to the authorization or power so as to live in a justice society.
This institutional economic view of the west presents readers the facts of a west that is not that disorderly, but disciplined; by capitalism and investors. The morale of this article is that the Hollywood images of the old west are not accurate, well-defined property rights links to wealth and prosperity, and that institutional entrepreneurs are heroes who civilize the world and even provide proper management to natural resources so that they are not
The first of which explains that men have a natural right to acquire and possess property; this argument is the most important to the overarching theme of his work. Locke’s overall political theory tells that men have inherent, natural rights in the state of nature, rights which are independent of larger society: they are life, liberty and property (¶124). Locke argues that despite the fact that God gave earth to mankind in common, men own their own bodies, including what we put into our bodies such as food and that which we make from our bodies, so “excludes the common right of other men” (¶27). The example of food actually becomes a cornerstone in Locke’s logic of natural property rights. Locke insists everyone is bound to preserve himself by reason, (¶6) such preservation requires the intake of food; therefore man is inclined to possess private property to preserve himself.
The other is political issue of supporting wars in Israel and their American armies. Using other theoretical analysis to examine the issues, the report further supports findings and implication based on the issues. In the end, this reports also shows the opinion to improve for Starbucks. 2. Social Issue: Trademark for Ethiopia farmers 3.1 Argument between Oxfam and Starbucks Starbucks blocked Ethiopia to apply trademark for their coffee beans.
Reflection of “The Land Ethic” - Manuel Soto “Land is not merely soil but a fountain of energy flowing through a circuit of soils, plants, and animals. Food chains are living channels which conduct energy upward; death and decay return it to the soil.” The quote is from Aldo Leopold’s “The Land Ethic”. Ethics, as we know them, are differentiations of social from antisocial conduct. Ecologically, Ethics are limitations on freedom of action in the struggle for existence. Aldo Leopold’s “The Land Ethic” is an article addressing concerns on the liberties we have taken with the biotic community and our lack of obligation to the land.
Instead of using Ethnocentrism, we should view Caliban using Cultural Relativism, because he belongs to the natural world, what he thinks and what he does should not be measured by “civilized” men, but by his own cultural morals. In “‘This Island’s Mine’: Caliban and Colonislism,” Trevor Criffiths introduces that, prior to the nineteenth century, Caliban was described only as a preternatural being. In 1838, Macready wrote an analysis of Caliban along colonial lines. Later, Caliban is identified textually with anti-slavery campaigns. In the later nineteenth-century, it was very difficult to part between Caliban “as native, as proletarian, and as missing link.” Along with the “missing link,” Caliban has been described between an ape and the lowest of savages, making Caliban, the dispossessed native, a sympathetic character for audiences.
It stands to reason however, that anyone’s position on a matter is subject to challenge or criticism. Taking this into consideration I will explore Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarianism and it’s potential to challenge my thesis on our moral obligation to the environment. While I find the anthropocentric view selfish in nature, it can be used to great effect to justify my claim. Anthropocentrism puts forward the claim that humans are at the centre of nature, and in order to sustain our existence and continue to advance, every living thing and resource exists solely to serve that purpose (Cochrane, 2007). Yet this does not imply that we should mine every mineral and strip every tree, for if we were to consume and take every resource to meet the demands of our ever advancing and growing civilisation, the planet would be devoid of all resources that humanity cannot exist without.
Regardless of how humane, animal rights proponents reject all animal use as exploitation and aim to ban all use of animals by humans. (1) Animal right is an extreme view that attempts to elevate all animals to equality with humans by applying human interpretations of morality. It is based on the philosophical belief that animals have moral rights to life, liberty and other privileges that should be protected by society and the rule of law. In this way, a human infant will be having the same right to life as a mouse in the street or a cow in the pasture. In contrast, animal welfare takes the position that it is morally acceptable for humans to use non-human animals, provided that the testing minimizes animal use and suffering.