what's the underlying virtue behind privileging preservation of number of species in the world?
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).
-
I then wondered why it is that domesticated animals (many of which have a staggering variety of unique breeds) are not given the same status by the very people who seem to support modern environmentalist ethics.
-
When I try to think about why this is so, I can't escape the conclusion that there are two different "moral systems" at play here -- one of "city-dwellers" and another of "rural dwellers."
-
at least two different ones. very different ethical calculus between first-world and third-world versions of those as well. environmental ethics atomizes very quickly based on local conditions.
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.