By (Editor), (Editor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Goodreads Author) (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor), (Contributor). ' Environmental Ethics: An Anthology' brings together both classic and cutting-edge essays which have formed contemporary environmental ethics, ranging from the welfare of animals versus ecosystems to theories of the intrinsic value of nature. Contents: An overview of environmental ethics by Clare Palmer The land ethic by Aldo Leopold Is there a need for a new, an environmental ' Environmental Ethics: An Anthology' brings together both classic and cutting-edge essays which have formed contemporary environmental ethics, ranging from the welfare of animals versus ecosystems to theories of the intrinsic value of nature. Contents: An overview of environmental ethics by Clare Palmer The land ethic by Aldo Leopold Is there a need for a new, an environmental, ethic? By Richard Sylvan (Routley) Not for humans only: the place of nonhumans in environmental issues by Peter Singer Animal rights: what's in a name? With a brief extract from The case for animal rights by Tom Regan The ethics of respect for nature by Paul W.
Taylor Is there a place for animals in the moral consideration of nature? By Eric Katz Can animal rights activists be environmentalists? Varner Against the moral considerability of ecosystems by Harley Cahen The varieties of intrinsic value by John O'Neill Value in nature and the nature of value by Holmes Rolston III The source and locus of intrinsic value: a reexamination by Keekok Lee Environmental ethics and weak anthropocentrism by Bryan G. Norton Weak anthropocentric intrinsic value by Eugene Hargrove Moral pluralism and the course of environmental ethics by Christopher D. Stone The case against moral pluralism by J.
Baird Callicott Minimal, moderate, and extreme moral pluralism by Peter S. Wenz The case for a practical pluralism by Andrew Light Deep ecology: a new philosophy of our time? By Warwick Fox The deep ecological movement: some philosophical aspects by Arne Naess Ecofeminism: toward global justice and planetary health by Greta Gaard and Lori Gruen Ecological feminism and ecosystem ecology by Karen J. Warren and Jim Cheney Beyond intrinsic value: pragmatism in environmental ethics by Anthony Weston Pragmatism in environmental ethics: democracy, pluralism, and the management of nature by Ben A. Minteer and Robert E.
Manning The ethics of sustainable resources by Donald Scherer Toward a just and sustainable economic order by John B. Ethics, public policy, and global warming by Dale Jamieson Faking nature by Robert Elliot The big lie: human restoration of nature by Eric Katz Ecological restoration and the culture of nature: a pragmatic perspective by Andrew Light An amalgamation of wilderness preservation arguments by Michael P.
Nelson A critique of and an alternative to the wilderness area by J. Baird Callicott Wilderness-now more than ever: a response to Callicott by Reed F. Noss Feeding people versus saving nature?
By Holmes Rolston III Saving nature, feeding people, and ethics by Robin Attfield Integrating environmentalism and human rights by James W. Nickel and Eduardo Viola Environmental justice: an environmental civil rights value acceptable to all world views by Troy W. Hartley Sustainability and intergenerational justice by Brian Barry Democracy and sense of place values in environmental policy by Bryan G. Norton and Bruce Hannon Environmental awareness and liberal education by Andrew Brennan. Andrew Light, Ph.D., is a Senior Fellow at American Progress specializing in climate, energy, and science policy. He coordinates American Progress’s participation in the Global Climate Network, focusing on international climate change policy and the future of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. He is also director of the Center for Global Ethics at George Mason University.
Li Andrew Light, Ph.D., is a Senior Fellow at American Progress specializing in climate, energy, and science policy. He coordinates American Progress’s participation in the Global Climate Network, focusing on international climate change policy and the future of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. He is also director of the Center for Global Ethics at George Mason University. Light is an internationally recognized expert on the relationship between environmental policy and ethics, specializing in restoration ecology, urban ecology, and climate change. He also comments frequently on the ethical and social impacts of new and emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology and synthetic biology. On these topics he has authored, co-authored, and edited 17 books including: Environmental Values (2008); Philosophy and Design (2008); Controlling Technology (2005); Environmental Ethics (2003); Moral and Political Reasoning in Environmental Practice (2003); Technology and the Good Life? (2000); and Environmental Pragmatism (1996).
Light is also co-editor of the journal Ethics, Place, and Environment. Light is a frequent advisor to various agencies on the ethical dimensions of environmental and technology policy, including the U.S. Forest Service, the National Parks Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Science Foundation. He is currently working on questions of fairness and equity in national and international regimes for climate regulation and the social impacts of new energy technologies. His doctoral work was at the University of California at Riverside and UCLA in ethics and public policy, and he completed a three-year postdoctoral fellowship in environmental risk assessment in the School of Medicine at the University of Alberta.
Palmer provides an overview of the complex and contested discourse of environmental ethics, in order to contextualize this area of philosophy. She starts with a historical overview and Overview of Environmental Ethics by Palmer, C. Page 15 She first defines the issues that environmental ethics deals with, as “ways in which human beings can and should interact with the nonhuman natural world”. Approaches discussed in the English-speaking Western world over the last 30 years She provides an overview of the complex and contested discourse about environmental ethics, in order to contextualize this area of philosophy. History She sites Carson’s Silent Spring as the precursor to environmental ethics, as is also the case with historical reflections on the development of the environmentalism movement, and the beginnings of sustainability science. Environmental ethics took shape in the early 1970s, with the first environmental philosophy conference being held in 1971 and Richard Sylvan writing a paper asking if there was a need for a new ethic relating to the environment.
The same year as Sylvan’s paper was published (1973) the early stages of the deep ecology movement were being formulated by Arne Naess. Page 16 John Passmore’s philosophical exploration, Man’s Responsibility for Nature, was published the following year. Within five years the debate about animal rights and the ethics of human relationships with non-humans gathered momentum.
By the end of the decade (1979) Eugene Hargrove was disseminating the journal of Environmental Ethics, which is still the most significant journal in the area of environmental ethics, according to Palmer. Since the mid-1980s this field has burgeoned, seeing the addition of numerous journals, books, programs and research projects. By the end of the 1980s the International Society for Environmental Ethics (ISEE) was founded and courses were being taught at tertiary levels. The frameworks and debates of environmental ethics continue to evolve and expand today, and the subject is now an established and thriving academic field – still highly contested and complex. Central Questions in Environmental Ethics One of the main areas of enquiry in environmental ethics is that of value theory, which questions what is valuable and where value resides, examining the variety of implications associated with these questions. One of the common distinction made in environmental ethics is between instrumental and non-instrumental values. “Instrumental value is assigned to something for its usefulness, as a means to an end.” Non-instrumental value, often broadly termed as ‘intrinsic’ value, is based on the value of something in and of itself, as an end rather than a means to an end.
The concept of intrinsic value raises questions around part two of the central dilemma in environmental ethics, as per Palmer’s framing – where does the value we assign or perceive come from. Arguments in this contested terrain enter the realm of subjective vs objective values. Value subjectivists argue that we create value as human beings and attach this value to things of our choosing, be they qualities, conditions or other people. Page 17 Value objectivists believe that intrinsic value pre-exists outside of our value judgements, thus the value resides in the things themselves.
In the case of objectivist thinking we don’t project or fabricate value, but recognize it where it is already present (Palmer). This position leads to some interesting questions about the nature and location of value. Both subjective and objective value stances query the location of value, and how we determine what is of intrinsic value. Many ideas have sought to speak to this problem, such as looking to the “attributes of individual living organisms”, the ability to perform certain functions or simply being alive, as well as more collective notions of diversity and equilibrium.
J, Baird Callicott proposes that we create values, thus all values are subjective and anthropogenic in nature. For Callicott the idea that humans create value does not mean equate to bias, in that the value is not necessarily human centered, or anthropocentric. As generators of meaning we are able to place, or create intrinsic value on non-human entities (organisms, systems, states). Hargrove holds similar beliefs to Callicott, but Holmes Rolston offers an opposing view – that of interpreting value in nonhumans as objective. For Rolston value “pre-exists human beings, is located in individuals, species, ecosystems and evolutionary processes, and would continue even if humans were to become extinct.” This is a case for intrinsic value, where the natural world has its own value, regardless of its usefulness to humankind. Tying these ideas together, Keekok Lee proposes that we conceptualize different variations of intrinsic values, namely the “articulated” intrinsic value of humans, which is anthropocentric and subjective, and the “mutely enacted” value of the nonhuman world, which is objective and located in all living beings. Delving deeper, the key question is how do the theories on value translate into practice.
How do these ideas about value guide or impact on our actions in the nonhuman world? Value theory lies at the core of ethical considerations but similar or dissimilar practical results can be derived from conflicting, or even compatible philosophical conclusions. Environmental pragmatism examines the potential for different theoretical viewpoints on environmental ethics to arrive at similar ethical outcomes in practice. The last central question that Palmer explores is that of the likelihood of universal application and agreement on a single set of ethical principles. The quandary is “whether it is possible, within an ethical constituency so large that it could include the entire planet, to arrive at a single governing ethical principle or set of consistent principles to apply to all ethical problems.” This discussion centres on the difference between monism and pluralism in environmental ethics, with the former dominating early discussions.
Environmental Ethics An Anthology
More contemporary arguments conclude that the goal of a single set of coherent ethical principles is unrealistic given the scope of considerations, applications and perspectives. Adopting appropriate ethical “frameworks” has been suggested as a more workable solution to meeting specific challenges in different contexts. Page 18 Anthropocentric approaches Most human-centered approaches advocate for an instrumental view to values, based on the usefulness of the nonhuman to human beings. This includes less obvious and tangible uses and values, such as aesthetic and psychological values.
An important qualification is that the anthropocentric ethical reference point does not condone exploitation of natural entities and organisms; on the contrary a human-centered approach can be used to drive wise use of resources. Instrumental values can ”maintain that natural resources should be carefully managed for human benefit – including for the poor and future generations.
This instrumental school of thought informs much of the global policy on environmental relations and frames much of our debate around critical environmental challenges. On the level of mainstream political debate the ethical agenda centres almost exclusively on resource management. So too does much of the work in the field of sustainable development focus on managing the environment in ways that can improve the lives of humans, with emphasis on social and inter-generational justice.
The traditional definition of sustainable development is anthropocentric, albeit evolving from its original inception. One such theorist, Donald Scherer, questions our position of privilege in the arena of sustainable development, urging a more expansive approach that incorporates a broader understanding of environmental ethics, moving beyond anthropocentrism. Passmore answers Routley’s question from an anthropocentric view, by stating that we don’t need a new environmental ethic. The problem he and others find with the new ethic based on non-anthropocentric values, is the “doubt that there are any rigorous grounds on which intrinsic values in the nonhuman natural world can be based” The nature of values is such that they are human-generated and -biased, focussing on human needs. For Passmore, the established “Western traditions of environmental management – such as a stewardship tradition – if developed and applied to current ecological problems.
Can be perfectly adequate. Why then are we in the poly-crisis that we are in, and does this view not fail to acknowledge the extent of the problems? Norton offers another anthropocentric perspective, considered a weak form of anthropocentrism, whereby environmental ethics need not resort to “difficult to justify claims to intrinsic values” (palmers quotes). His theory of weak anthropocentric ethics is validated as such: “A perfectly sufficient environmental ethic, which can criticize value systems purely exploitative of nature, can be justified on (weakly) anthropocentric grounds alone – which may be the best pragmatic response in a variety of situations where the environment is under threat.” Has this been enough? Evidence suggests otherwise, but what are our options in practice?
Perhaps this is the closest we have to a workable and broadly acceptable solution that can gain sufficient support! This human-centered ethic is largely concerned with protecting the resource base over the long-term, for human benefit. One of the strongest drivers of discussion in the field of environmental ethics is in response to anthropocentric theories of instrumental value. Page 19 Responses and new ideas within environmental ethics have largely been aimed at refuting human-centered orientations, calling for “new ways of thinking about and valuing” the nonhuman world. Resource management approaches, however, still prevail outside of intellectual work in the area of environmental ethics. Recent years have seen attempts to reconcile resource management and theoretical ideas about environmental ethics – finding common ground in order to work towards a shared goal, even based on disparate underlying values. Environmental pragmatism is one of the approaches of environmental ethics that seeks to bring economic and political aspects of resource management together with ethical aspects of human-nature relations.
Individual consequentialist approaches Utilitarian aims for ethical choices that produce the best consequences, at the level of the individual. Value is placed in the ‘state of affairs’ of the individual, not the entity itself. Hedonistic utilitarianism promotes ethics that maximize pleasure and minimize pain, assigning moral consideration to organisms that can have subjective experiences (feel pleasure or pain).
By this model an entity that has subjective experiences is considered to hold ‘interests’, and that which falls outside of moral consideration is identified as having no interests. But it is the state of affairs – the experience – that is valued, more than the entity having interests.
Accordingly sentience is used a gauge – where sentient animals become morally relevant, because they have interests and subjective experience. If the total experience is valued then individuals can be replaced as long as the state of affairs improves, is maintained. This position would technically support “therapeutic hunting” as pointed out by Varner.
Later Singer adapts his hedonistic utilitarianism to preference utilitarianism where the morally considerable can be seen in two categories – conscious and self-conscious. (almost a direct quote). Conscious beings have subjective experiences but are not self-aware, whereas self-conscious beings are aware and have preferences over time.
Here it becomes about preference to live, desire for interests in the future. Self-conscious beings with an interest in preservation into the future trump the value of those that don’t have preferences. Thus he includes other self-aware organisms as more morally valuable than merely sentient beings that are more replaceable. This is a classic utilitarian position further defined as preference utilitarianism, where value is formed on the basis of the state of affairs experienced by sentient beings. Page 20 The core of locating value in the utilitarian approach is the ability for subjective experience, which establishes hierarchies of interests. VanDe Veer sets out two factors for assessing individual value – psychological complexity and the priority of the claim/need. Thus basic claims take precedence and complex psychological beings are more important in the value calculations aimed at maximizing total utility for the best consequences.
Thus he also excludes non-sentient beings and entities from moral consideration, beyond their utility value to sentient beings. Where does this place wildlife? Robin Attfield spurred a significant shift in environmental ethics discourse by breaking the connection between value and experience. He reframed the ethics of determining value to the basis of a beings “ability to flourish, to exercise the basic capacities of a species”. This means that living organisms able to develop have interests and should be considered irrelevant of whether they are sentient. Attfield ultimately places value on the state of affairs of flourishing and not the individual, which makes him a consequentialist.
Page 25 Reconciling positions Individualism and holistic views are two opposing theoretical strands in the arena of contentious environmental ethics. Many environmental ethicists have responded by developing approaches that draw on both individualist and holistic theories. Page 26 Callicotts theory of “nested communities” endeavours to bring individualism and holism together by placing humans at the centre of embedded circles diminishing in importance as they move outwards. This simultaneously raises humans to a morally superior position and creates responsibilities of moral obligation towards other communities. A key thinker in current debates, Holmes Rolston, argues for objective value in nonhumans, using telos as a basis for determining such value.
Here each individual holds value because it has good of its own. Page 33 This overview shows how complex the ethical issues are and how diverse the theories. New ethical approaches are emerging in response to the recognition that systems, processes and collectives may be morally important, from ecosystems and biospheres to biodiversity.
Environmental ethics is tasked with guiding our responses to ethical problems relating to species, systems and processes – the nonhuman components that ensure our survival. NEAR THE START: Environmental ethics has primarily looked at “how humans should think about wild environments, and what values they might carry” but this is shifting to encompass other kinds of environments given the decline of wilderness areas. My focus is primarily on the wild environment, however. “An Overview of Environmental Ethics”, in Environmental Ethics: An Anthology. Edited by Andrew Light and Holmes Rolston III.
Blackwell, Malden.
Environmental Ethics: An Anthology. Andrew Light, Holmes Rolston, III. Wiley, Aug 16, 2002 - Philosophy - 568 pages.
Environmental Ethics: An Anthology (941): Andrew Light, Holmes Rolston III: Books. Environmental Ethics: An Anthology (forthcoming) Inc Environmental Philosophy, Eugene C. Hargrove & Holmes Rolston, Environmental Ethics, Volume 3, by Andrew Light (Editor), Holmes Rolston III (Editor), Harley Cahen (Contributor), John Environmental Ethics: An Anthology' brings together both classic and Environmental Ethics: An Anthology cover image. Environmental An Anthology.
By Andrew Light (Editor), Holmes Rolston, III (Editor). Similar books and articles.
Andrew Light & Holmes Rolston Iii (forthcoming). Introduction: Ethics and Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics: An Anthology.
Environmental Ethics: An Anthology brings together both classic and Ethics and Environmental Ethics (Andrew Light and Holmes Rolston III). Environmental ethics: an anthology / edited by Andrew Light and Holmes in nature and the nature of value / Holmes Rolston III; The source and locus of Acknowledgments. Introduction to the Volume: Ethics and Environmental Ethics (Andrew Light and Holmes Rolston III).
Part I: What is Environmental Ethics? Environmental Ethics: An Anthology. Maintained and Andrew Light & Holmes Rolston Iii (forthcoming). Earthcare: An Anthology in Environmental Ethics.
. Aland Islands. Albania. Andorra. Armenia. Austria. Azerbaijan.
Belarus. Belgium. Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bulgaria. Croatia.
Cyprus. Czech Republic. Denmark. Estonia. Finland.
France. Georgia. Germany.
Gibraltar. Greece.
Greenland. Holy See (Vatican City State). Hungary. Iceland.
Ireland. Italy.
Latvia. Liechtenstein.
Lithuania. Luxembourg. Macedonia. Malta. Moldova.
Monaco. Montenegro. Netherlands. Norway. Poland. Portugal. Romania.
Russia. Serbia. Slovakia. Slovenia. Spain. Sweden.
Switzerland. Turkey.
Ukraine. United Kingdom. American Samoa. Australia. Bangladesh.
Environmental Ethics An Anthology Pdf
Bhutan. British Indian Ocean Territory. Brunei.
Nov 29, 2017 - It is the only reliable software just like an older version of Corel Draw Free download. You will surely be able to change the layout of images according to your choice. Corel Draw x4 Keygen Generator enables the user to use latest matchless color brushes to shine or enhance the color of illustrating. Corel draw x4 free download full version with keygen for windows 7. Corel Draw X4 Full Version Free Download. CoreDraw X4 Full Keygen Free Download Full Version. CorelDRAW Graphics Suite X4 very Famous software in this world. The Software is all about is Editing creating Logo Banner Web Designing and many more function.
Cambodia. China. Christmas Island. Cocos (Keeling) Islands. Cook Islands. Fiji. Guam.
India. Indonesia. Japan. Kazakhstan. Korea (the Republic of). Kyrgyzstan.
Andrew Light
Laos. Malaysia. Maldives.
Mongolia. Myanmar. Nepal. New Zealand.
Pakistan. Papua New Guinea. Philippines. Samoa. Singapore. Solomon Islands. Sri Lanka.
Tajikistan. Thailand. Timor-Leste. Tonga. Turkmenistan. Uzbekistan. Vanuatu.
Vietnam. About the Author Andrew Light is Assistant Professor of Environmental Philosophy at New York University, and Research Fellow at the Institute for Environment, Philosophy, and Public Policy at Lancaster University, UK.
He has edited or co-edited thirteen books, including Environmental Pragmatism (1996), Social Ecology after Bookchin (1999), and Technology and the Good Life (2000). He is also co-editor of the journal Philosophy and Geography and President of the Society for Philosophy and Technology.
Holmes Rolston III is University Distinguished Professor and Professor of Philosophy at Colorado State University. He is often called “the father of environmental ethics” as an academic discipline and was featured in Fifty Key Thinkers on the Environment (2001). He is author of numerous books including Philosophy Gone Wild (1986), Environmental Ethics (1988), Conserving Natural Value (1997), and Genes, Genesis and God (1999). He is past president of the International Society for Environmental Ethics.
Introduction to the Volume: Ethics and Environmental Ethics (Andrew Light and Holmes Rolston III). Part I: What is Environmental Ethics?
An Introduction. An Overview of Environmental Ethics (Clare Palmer).
'The Land Ethic' (Aldo Leopold). Is There a Need for a New, an Environmental, Ethic?
(Richard Sylvan). Part II: Who Counts in an Environmental Ethics? 'Not for Humans Only: The Place of Nonhumans in Environmental Issues' (Peter Singer). 'Animal Rights: What's in a Name?'
Plus a brief extract from 'The Case for Animal Rights' (Tom Regan). 'The Ethics of Respect for Nature' (Paul Taylor). 'Is There a Place for Animals in the Moral Consideration of Nature?'
'Can Animal Rights Activists Be Environmentalists?' (Gary Varner).
'Against the Moral Considerability of Ecosystems' (Harley Cahen). Part III: Is Nature Intrinsically Valuable? 'Varieties of Intrinsic Value' (John O'Neill). 'Value in Nature and the Nature of Value' (Holmes Rolston, III). 'Source and Locus of Intrinsic Value' (Keekok Lee). 'Environmental Ethics and Weak Anthropocentrism' (Bryan Norton).
'Weak Anthropocentric Intrinsic Value' (Eugene Hargrove). Part IV: Is There One Environmental Ethic? Monism versus Pluralism.
'Moral Pluralism and the Course of Environmental Ethics' (Christopher Stone). 'The Case against Moral Pluralism' (J.
Baird Callicott). 'Minimal, Moderate, and Extreme Moral Pluralism' (Peter Wenz). 'Callicott and Naess on Pluralism' (Andrew Light).
Part V: Reframing Environmental Ethics: What Alternatives Exist? Deep Ecology. 'Deep Ecology: A New Philosophy of our Time?' (Warwick Fox). 'The Deep Ecology Movement: Some Philosophical Aspects' (Arne Naess).
'Ecofeminism: Toward Global Justice and Planetary Health' (Greta Gaard and Lori Gruen). 'Ecological Feminism and Ecosystem Ecology' (Karren J. Warren and Jim Cheney). Environmental Pragmatism. 'Beyond Intrinsic Value: Pragmatism in Environmental Ethics' (Anthony Weston).
'Pragmatism in Environmental Ethics: Democracy, Pluralism, and the Management of Nature' (Ben A. Minteer and Robert E.
Part VI: Focusing on Central Issues: Sustaining, Restoring, Preserving Nature. Is Sustainability Possible? 'Sustainable Resources Ethics' (Donald Scherer).
'Toward a Just and Sustainble Economic Order' (John Cobb). 'Ethics, Public Policy, and Global Warming' (Dale Jamieson).
Can and Ought We Restore Nature? 'Faking Nature' (Robert Elliot). 'The Big Lie: Human Restoration of Nature' (Eric Katz). 'Ecological Restoration and the Culture of Nature: A Pragmatic Perspective' (Andrew Light). Should We Preserve Wilderness? 'An Amalgmation of Wilderness Preservation Arguments' (Michael P. 'A Critique of and an Alternative to the Wilderness Idea' (J.
Baird Callicott). 'Wilderness - Now More than Ever' (Reed F. Part VII: What on Earth Do We Want? Human Social Issues and Environmental Values. 'Feeding People versus Saving Nature' (Holmes Rolston, III). 'Saving Nature, Feeding People and Ethics' (Robin Attfield).
'Integrating Environmentalism and Human Rights' (James W. Nickel and Eduardo Viola). 'Environmental Justice: An Environmental Civil Rights Value Acceptable to All World Views' (Troy W.
'Sustainability and Intergenerational Justice' (Brian Barry). 'Democracy and Sense of Place Values in Environmental Policy' (Bryan Norton and Bruce Hannon). 'Environmental Awareness and Liberal Education' (Andrew Brennan). ' Environmental Ethics ranks with the best of recent collections and will make an excellent course text. The skillful blend of classic and contemporary essays generates a clear sense both of the ongoing debates and the developing agenda of the subject, and demonstrates its growing importance for social decision-making.' Alan Holland, Lancaster University, UK
Albert Borgmann, University of Montana “ Environmental Ethics is comprehensive, assembles both classics and new initiatives, and is organized so as to throw into clear relief the focal issues and critical debates that define the field. It is an invaluable guide for navigating the rapidly changing terrain that is environmental ethics, and one that pushes the field forward on a number of important fronts.' Alison Wylie, Washington University, St.
Comprises both classic and cutting edge essays on topics ranging from the welfare of animals versus ecosystems, to theories of the intrinsic value of nature. Presents important works on particular environmental issues, such as wilderness preservation and global climate change. Discusses alternatives to traditional environmental ethics, including deep ecology, ecofeminism, and environmental pragmatism. Additional editorial material provides a helpful overview of the field and points to new directions and controversies shaping the relationship between humans and nature into the future.