Rewilding Anthropocentrism
Rewilding is often promoted and defended with eudaimonistic reasons, by appeals to living better, happier lives. It has long been argued eudaimonistic reasoning is hopelessly self-interested and, in an environmental context, anthropocentric. Holmes Rolston’s classic critique of environmental virtue...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Recurso Electrónico Artigo |
| Idioma: | Inglês |
| Verificar disponibilidade: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Carregar...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publicado em: |
2025
|
| Em: |
Environmental ethics
Ano: 2025, Volume: 47, Número: 1, Páginas: 5-22 |
| Acesso em linha: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Resumo: | Rewilding is often promoted and defended with eudaimonistic reasons, by appeals to living better, happier lives. It has long been argued eudaimonistic reasoning is hopelessly self-interested and, in an environmental context, anthropocentric. Holmes Rolston’s classic critique of environmental virtue ethics stands to challenge the rewilding movement’s increasing focus on happier lives, rather than intrinsic natural value. This critique misses the mark, however, by insisting on an impressively longstanding, yet unhelpfully rigid distinction between egoistic and altruistic ethical reasoning. In this way, Rolston’s critique serves as an example of some much older and larger tensions which haunt everyday ethical thinking, tensions between desiring the good and doing what’s right, between self-love and selfishness. This paper embraces Rolston’s lifelong love of our living world, while nuancing what it means to hope for a Good Life within it. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2153-7895 |
| Obras secundárias: | Enthalten in: Environmental ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.5840/enviroethics202513192 |
