Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Passmore's compelling case for 'conservation',
By Declan Rice (Thurles, Co. Tipperary Ireland) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Mans Responsibility for Nature: Ecological Problems and Western Traditions (Paperback)
John Passmore's book first appeared a number of decades ago, but is still setting the agenda for those with a concern for the environment who think that support humanity's actions in living and developing a coherent society and a care for nature are not mutually exclusive concerns. Passmore's argument is basically that man's concern with the tratement of the environment is basically an argument between people and that it is a mistake to assume that nature or animals can have any rights in an area in which they have no consciouness. Passmore contends, (in a very rough way), that rights cannot be bestowed on beings without a consciousness. We may decide to protect the environment for many reason, aesthetic, a desire to sustain bio-diversity, security of resources for medical research, etc. But the essential element in all such decisions is that a human or humans, not an animal or a plant make the decision! As we cannot abrogate to overselves the right of proxy to what a non-sentient animal, plant or habitat which 'desire', we can only make ethical decisions on the basis of human morality as it affects other humans. Therefore, Passsmore contends, we must make our environmental descisions on the basis of 'conserving' the environment for humans, not on 'preserving' it for a nature that can have no awareness of these ethical decisions.In reality this may make no difference to individual actions- the preservationsist chained to the redwood who wishes to save the tree from the loggers on account of its contribution to nature's spirit, may be joined on his chain by a conservationist who wishes to preserve the tree for the aesthetic benefit of future generations of humanity. Passmore does not condone treating nature as a resource at the total whim of humanity, but of instead the prioritising of mankind's legitimate needs in any equation that involves an intervention in the environment. Thus if a wetland on the edge of a human settlement is a home to a significant malaria-hosting mosquito colony, the 'conservationist' decision whether to drain it will be a balance between the loss of bio-diversity and the healthy of the people of the town. In some cases the decision will fall on draining the swamp, in others the conservationist will say, the wetland should remain on account of its other benefits. It was the call for new standard of ethics to meet the growing environmentalist movement that promoted Passmore to publish this book. He claims, (and this reviewer finds his claim complelling), that traditional ethical standards are perfectly adequate to meet the challenge of concern for nature. Instead of a new standard based on the rights of nature, Passmore contends, that a more effective and coherent avenue in protecting the environment is in the prosecuting of 'vadalism' -damaging the enviroment without sufficent benefit to mankind. Since the publication of the book, Passmore stand has been condemed by many in the environmentalist movement, but without in this reviewer's judgement, his case has not been seriously damaged by any of the attacks. To those of us who care deeply for the environment, but also care for the legitimate rights of humanity to live in that environment, Passmore has set the standard. Read this book, even if you disagree it will give much food for thought.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
