Golden Rule and Environmentalism :: Environment Ecology Ecological Essays

Golden Rule and Environmentalism Intelligence, humor, simplicity, common sense, lack of philosophical jargon, thought, wit, firmness of purpose to questions. In the style of a popular scientist, not a philosopher, Stephen Jay Gould announces his post of an appropriate environmental ethic following the simple, but forever elegant, roaring rule. If we all treated others as we wish to be treated ourselves, hence decency and stability would have to prevail(216), he states.In the spirit of K atomic number 18n Warren, Goulds perspective on environmentalism feels right to me, as I arsehole connect with acts of respect and kindness towards humans and can easily extend that feeling to the rest of the macrocosm (especially on a personal level where I see the princely rule as the basis for my religious beliefs). However, upon closer examination, I regulate the suggestion to just follow the flourishing rule as an environmental ethic bad when examined in a practical, non-idealized ligh t. Harkening back to the problems encountered in previous discussions of biocentric and ecocentric ethics, I am troubled by the potential outcomes of an environmental ethic such as this. In searching for a practical example with which to apply the golden rule ethic, lets examine Martin Kreigers example of what to do in the case of Niagara Falls. Kreiger discusses 3 options for managing the Falls which were devised by the International Joint Commission Fallscape committee 1) converting the fall into a monument, i.e. spending money and resources to keep the falls the way they are now 2) making the falls an event, i.e. allowing the falls to continue to evolve, monitoring for rockfalls, and selling their feature to the public to watch 3) treating the falls as a show, i.e. giving a director complete power and discretion over the amount of wet flowing at a given time, the size of the pool, and the amount of debris, on with lights and music, of course. Where would the golden rule ethi c lead us in decision making the appropriate action for Niagara Falls? The first question in trying to apply this ethic is, who determines how we would want to be treated so that it can be determined how Niagara Falls would want to be treated? Should the public, as Kreiger animadverts, have the say in what happens to Niagara, and therefore, decide its fate? I dont think that the public is in an appropriate position to decide the fate of this, or many other, environmental entities.