Environmental Virtue Ethics by

Language: eng
Format: azw3
ISBN: 9780742578548
Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers
Published: 2005-02-04T05:00:00+00:00

The Possibility of Benevolence as an Environmental Virtue

Writers on ecotheology have often acknowledged the role of benevolence in shaping environmentally desirable attitudes.3 Donald Hughes, for instance, has argued that the influence of St. Francis plays an important, positive role in shaping Christian attitudes toward nature.4 In addition to recognizing the goodness of all of God’s creation, including the animals, St. Francis held that the fact of biodiversity in creation and the delight God takes in this diversity represent God’s benevolent presence. From this Hughes argues that we have a duty not just to abstain from harming God’s creations but also to adopt an attitude of respect for them.

Also writing on issues of Christianity and the environment, Holmes Rolston III points out that biblically based faith is founded on the belief that the covenanted Promised Land is sacred and good, separate from any instrumental value it might have for humans.5 But the intrinsic goodness of the created world notwithstanding, Rolston worries that a Christian ethic that advocates virtuous treatment of humans may not easily be expanded into virtuous treatment of the nonhuman world and its inhabitants. He argues, however, that central tenets of Christian faith, including the promise of redemption, can be found in an ecological understanding of the land.

Although these accounts suggest that it is possible to cultivate a benevolent relationship with nature, they leave undeveloped the actual nature of benevolence as an environmental virtue, as well as the justification for why we would want to cultivate it. More helpful is Jennifer Welchman’s account in which she argues that benevolence and loyalty are necessary features of good stewardship for the land.6 One could, she argues, voluntarily act as a good steward for the land even if motivated by an enlightened anthropocentrism. Acts motivated by enlightened self-interest can include preservation of resources, biodiversity, and natural beauty. After all, benevolence toward our own descendents is a strong motivator for action. But what about motivation for the well-being of nonhuman others? Welchman argues that compassion alone is not enough to provide such a motivation. She concludes that benevolence, in the form of compassion for sentient beings, must be coupled with loyalty, in the sense of loyalty to one’s moral integrity, in order to complete the necessary virtues of stewardship of nature. Unfortunately for the project at hand, she focuses all her attention on providing a well-developed case for this loyalty to one’s moral integrity, leaving the notion of environmental benevolence underdeveloped.

Still more helpful to our project is the work of Frank Schalow, who takes the position that, from a Heideggerian perspective, the differences rather than the similarities between humans and animals provide an obligation for us to act in benevolent ways toward animals.7 Schalow argues against those who take an egalitarian view based on recognized similarities between humans and animals and instead stresses two distinctive features of human life—freedom and language—to develop a notion of obligation to the welfare of animals. It is, he argues, these differences between humans and animals that make possible benevolent actions by humans toward animals.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.