College of
Business
Administration
College of
Business
Administration
Questions for Seminar Presentation on Environmental Ethics
(French/Granrose Ch 10)1) "How ought one to live? That and what sort of earth are we aiming for are the bedrock issues that lie at the intersection of philosophy and spirit. They are issues that are resolved less by formal choice, in which the mind is governed by appeals to consistency, than by life-style choices" (Stone, p 280). What does the question of 'how ought one to live' have to do with 'business'?
2) The question of 'value' is foundational to discussions of environmental issues. How is a 'value' for the environment to be determined? Can 'value' be measured without reference to money? Is there a way to establish value without being homocentric?
"Zuckerman faced a dilemma. He had to choose whether to butcher Wilbur (the slaughterhouse would have paid for the pig) or on moral and aesthetic grounds to spare his life..."With what 'values' was Zuckerman concerned? Were any 'values' overlooked by the framing of the issue in the way outlined above?3) Apply the immediately previous question to these alternate world views:
"So this land of the great plains is claimed by the Lakota as their very own. We are of the soil and the soil is of us. We love the birds and beasts that grew with us on this soil. They drank the same water as we did and breathed the same air. We are all one in nature. Believing so, there was in our hearts a great peace and a welling kindness for all living, growing things." -Luther Standing Bear4) Locke's basic view about property ownership is implied in the following statements:"If you've seen one redwood tree, you've seen them all." -Ronald Reagan
"Whatsoever he removes out of the state that nature hath provided and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with it, and joined it to something of his own, and thereby makes it his property."In contrast, the Native American's basic view of ownership is implied in the following statement:
"...cultivating the earth and having dominion...are joined together." "Tis labour which puts the greatest part of value upon land, without which it would be scarcely worth anything.""...the Great Spirit told me...that the lands belong to Him, that no people owns the land."How do these two viewpoints differ with regard to the value of nature? Specifically, the intrinsic vs instrumental value? Is not the view that 'value' is established by the addition of 'our' labour hopelessly homocentric?5) Stone argues that "the commons areas are essentially underprotected" (p. 75). And Jeffreys, as cited in The ant, the grasshopper, and the GNP, states "Why is the water polluted now? Because no one owns it" (p. 46). How does owning property affect one's treatment of that property?
If we assume that owning property makes us behave more positively toward it, perhaps enclosure is a good way of protecting the environment. Agree or disagree. Do we have to go to the extreme of 'privitization' in order to protect the commons? What evidence can you offer in favor of 'privitization' (eg., how effective has privitization been in Eastern Europe)?
6) It becomes clear that 'preferences' and 'desires' play a large role in arguments of economic efficiency. What are the limits to the ability of market forces to correct for environmental harms?
7) Are animals morally considerable? Why or why not? If animals are morally considerable should that prevent us from exploiting them for our benefit? Is it OK to exploit an animal for research (cosmetic or medical)? What if it means an unpleasant life/death for the animal? Are we ever 'justified' in destroying animals for human good?
8) Is it wrong to exploit animals as performers, workers? What about domestication of animals as pets? Is it ever acceptable to kill an animal? For life, for food, sport?
What are the implications of your view of animal rights on the conduct of business enterprise?
Return to Professor Dunn's home page.