Abstract
This paper resumes a previous discussion on Environmental Ethics and Irreversibility, which was presented in 2005. There I first faced the problem. Now I would like to reevaluate the issue. Was my paper “catastrophist”? Or was it, instead, realistic? Which are today the main issues confronting Environmental Ethics? Plainly speaking, what can we really do? These are some of the questions I would like to bring in to the debate with my colleagues and the public. In other words, instead of focusing in the aspect of “irreversibility”, I prefer here to focus on the “responsibility” of agents and institutions. It rescues the so-called “Principle of Responsibility”, by Hans Jonas. There is also some debate with Karl-Otto Appel and Habermas. If, on one hand, there are irreversible damages to nature, as the extinction of species and even of natural locations, as rivers and other natural accidents, there are, on the other hand, many actions that can and must be taken in order to preserve or deter the grave consequences of the environmental degradation. In this paper, I try to discuss some of the problems and propose some solutions, but the more important thing is to call everyone – individuals, groups, or institutions – to responsibility face the Earth, the Human and not-human beings, and mainly the future generations.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: ethic@ - An international Journal for Moral Philosophy
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.