Golden Rule and Environmentalism :: Environment Ecology Ecological Essays

Golden Rule and Environmentalism Intelligence, humor, simplicity, common sense, lack of philosophical jargon, perspective, wit, answer to questions. In the style of a popular scientist, not a philosopher, Stephen Jay Gould announces his view of an admit environmental ethic following the simple, but forever elegant, well-situated loom. If we all told treated others as we wish to be treated ourselves, then decency and stableness would yield to prevail(216), he states.In the spirit of Karen Warren, Goulds perspective on environmentalism feels right to me, as I can connect with acts of respect and benevolence towards human being and can easily extend that feeling to the rest of the earth (especially on a personal level where I see the golden predominate as the basis for my religious beliefs). However, upon closer examination, I find the breath to just follow the golden rule as an environmental ethic problematic when examined in a practical, non-idealized light. Harkening back to t he problems encountered in previous discussions of biocentric and ecocentric ethics, I am debauched by the potential outcomes of an environmental ethic such as this. In searching for a practical example with which to arrest the golden rule ethic, lets examine Martin Kreigers example of what to do in the case of Niagara travel. Kreiger discusses three options for managing the Falls which were devised by the International Joint Commission Fallscape committee 1) converting the falls into a monument, i.e. spending money and resources to keep the falls the way they are direct 2) making the falls an event, i.e. allowing the falls to continue to evolve, monitoring for rockfalls, and selling their occurrence to the prevalent to watch 3) treating the falls as a show, i.e. giving a theater director complete power and discretion over the amount of water menstruation at a given time, the size of the pool, and the amount of debris, along with lights and music, of course. Where would the g olden rule ethic lead us in deciding the give up action for Niagara Falls? The first question in trying to apply this ethic is, who determines how we would want to be treated so that it can be determined how Niagara Falls would want to be treated? Should the world, as Kreiger thinks, have the say in what happens to Niagara, and therefore, decide its fate? I dont think that the public is in an appropriate position to decide the fate of this, or galore(postnominal) other, environmental entities.