A Territorial Mediation in a Triangular Affair Towards an Ecological Territorial Sovereignty

Donoso, Alfonso

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-17963-2_12

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…What primarily matters to such positions is either the harm, impediment to well-being or injustice that is borne by individual nonhuman beings, and thus, the relevant harm involved in extinctions is not found on the species level (Nussbaum, 2011). Yet, it is often arguedfor different reasonsthat these two levels of analysis are closely related (Agar, 2001;Regan, 2004;Taylor, 2011;Korsgaard, 2018a;Donoso, 2019;Baard, 2022). For example, according to animal rights theorist Tom Regan the preservation of the biotic community follows from showing 'proper respect for the rights of the individuals' (Regan, 1983(Regan, /2004 that are part of that community.…”

Section: Resulting From Harm To Nonhuman Individualsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ethics of species extinctions

Wienhues,

Baard,

Donoso

et al. 2023

Camb. prisms Extinction

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review provides an overview of the ethics of extinctions with a focus on the Western analytical environmental ethics literature. It thereby gives special attention to the possible philosophical grounds for Michael Soulé’s assertion that the untimely ‘extinction of populations and species is bad’. Illustrating such debates in environmental ethics, the guiding question for this review concerns why – or when – anthropogenic extinctions are bad or wrong, which also includes the question of when that might not be the case (i.e. which extinctions are even desirable). After providing an explanation of the disciplinary perspective taken (section “Introduction”), the concept of extinction and its history within that literature are introduced (section “Understanding extinction”). Then, in section “Why (or when) might anthropogenic extinctions be morally problematic?”, different reasons for why anthropogenic extinctions might be morally problematic are presented based on the loss of species’ value, harm to nonhuman individuals, the loss of valuable biological variety and duties to future generations. This section concludes by also considering cases where anthropogenic extinctions might be justified. Section “How to respond to extinctions?” then addresses a selection of topics concerning risks and de-extinction technologies. Finally, the section on “Extinction studies” introduces other viewpoints on the ethics of extinction from the extinction studies literature, followed by the “Conclusion”.

show abstract

Section: Resulting From Harm To Nonhuman Individualsmentioning

confidence: 99%