It is often said that humans have a responsibility to protect the environment. In many ways, I agree, but I cannot provide a rational argument as to why this is the case. I have a vague idea, but I cannot express it in words.
From a purely scientific point of view, it seems that we should focus first and foremost on our own survival and prosperity, even if it means leaving this planet devoid of life. In terms of evolution, the only purpose of life is to survive and continue to survive for as long as possible. Even if we take into account our added concept of happiness, what seems to matter is that we, as a species, are happy.
Why should we care about what happens to this planet, which is really just one blue marble in the vast ocean of space?
Please give as detailed an answer as possible and thank you in advance.
Agnieszka Will geb. Gronek, I do agree. We should act in a way that most likely secures our own survival. Is that way of acting congruent with protecting the Earth's environment?
Ethics is not a luxury but its goal is to protect society. That is why our responsibility for the environment is not a luxury, because there is no human being without the environment, hence moral responsibility
I do agree with that for the time being Ihsan Jasim, but does this responsibility for the environment extend to the point that it would end up reducing our own odds of survival? For instance, if stripping the resources of this planet was the best course of action, for getting off of it and surviving for millions of years, should we not do so?
It is our consciousness that will regulate our survival. our consciousness is the one who will preserve the environment. There is a difference between our survival as a species and our survival in numbers that exceed the probability of the environment, so it is our consciousness that will determine our culture and ethics later on.
I think to answer that question effectively one has to address the more pressing question which I believe I first encountered in John Leslie's book "The End of the World" (1996),and I paraphrase, What do we owe to the future? That is to say the unborn, the non-existent? What is the ethical debt we must pay to them?
Logically for now, only planet earth has the ability to support human life. Ethically we should not consume up natural resources just for the cause of survival. We must have a balanced approach that can help in survival and at the same time prolong the life of resources at hand. Evolution is good and imbedded in human instincts but there is a saying "access of anything is bad." So, we must be ethically responsible towards our environment, because at the end of the day we need environment to survive.
Article Salient Ecological Sensitive Regions of Central Western Ghats, India
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Ethics