Sometimes I am alarmed that so few people are “species ethicists.” In a Darwinian sense, the chicken had won a genetic lottery by being tasty, horse by being fast, dog by being friendly. Discontinuing meat is ethically equivalent to species extinction.
difficult in that I've never seen it because all of the environmentalists I've heard from are committed to biodiversity. not difficult in that I can easily imagine ways of measuring ecological health that are independent of number of species.
-
-
I think there's an underlying aesthetic preference for pristine/virginal wild spaces. Those ecosystems are characterized by very high biodiversity (usually, there are exceptions, e.g. Antarctica) and so the association of biodiversity with ecological health is made.
-
I'm also fond of that aesthetic but there are most certainly places that are not even close to pristine and we ought to still care about their ecological health. A healthy farm would have very low species diversity, for example.
-
So what do you draw from this?
-
That I care about the ecological health of not just wild places but also human places and that species diversity is a good measure of wild ecosystem health and a poor measure of human ecosystem health
-
and since domesticated animals and farms are human ecosystems I do not care about a domesticated species going extinct if the health of the ecosystem they lived within is improved because of it
-
Okay. This doesn't avoid my utilitarian justification for environmentalism though -- our future descendants might find certain species (or breeds) useful. There already are extinct breeds of domesticated animals -- like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_White_Terrier …
-
I didn't think we were debating whether or not environmentalism can be justified (it can be, in many different ways) the question is do we care about the loss of say, pigs, if a synthetic alternative becomes available. Lets just keep a few in a museum-zoo or something.
-
My original argument was that existence of species has a certain "moral worth" from the perspective of modern environmentalism (I didn't argue whether modern environmentalism is inherently justified or not -- I simply stated what seems to be the case).
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Not all environmentalists are absolutely committed to biodiversity though. Many consider "invasive" species to be bad even if their impact on local environment is fairly benign. So there is a big element of "preserving the fence that was built for a reason you don't know yet"
-
it cuts both ways, right? in many cases an introduced ("invasive") species is a preferred pest control solution to chemical spraying.
-
I think we know how internet threads like this end -- someone will bring up the example of gorillas that die off when winter comes.
-
the solution, clearly, is to start meat-farming gorillas so they'll never have to worry about staying warm in winter
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.