Abstract
In this chapter, I discuss the relevance of traditional moral philosophy for the analysis of the ethical dimension of sustainability. I argue that we cannot simply apply traditional moral philosophy, such as utilitarianism or deontology, to the ethical questions of sustainability, but that we rather need a new type of sustainability ethics. I also distinguish environmental ethics from sustainability ethics: subject matter of environmental ethics is the ethical dimension of the human-nature relationship, whereas the subject matter of sustainability ethics is the ethical aspects of the threefold relationship of human beings with contemporaries, future generation, and nature. However, I also identify elements of established ethics which are relevant for the project of sustainability ethics. I particularly refer to virtue ethics and ethics of care, and the insights of these theories into ethical aspects of relationships and the ethical relevance of structural and institutional frameworks for individual action and life. I argue that these insights can be made fruitful for sustainability ethics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
I restrict the discussion here to exemplary considerations on some main ethical approaches and characteristics. I hold, however, that some other important ethical theories, such as Rawls’ contract theory or discourse ethics, exhibit similar issues and limits in regard to the ethical dimension of sustainability. For some discussion extending to other ethical theories and characteristics, see, e.g., Palmer (1994) and Ott and Thapa (2003).
- 2.
It is important to note that I am using here a rather strict definition of deontology in the tradition of Kant. Some broader definitions just require that an ethical approach constitutes any kind of duty or individual dignity without referring to consequences to be a deontological approach. We then may evaluate the limits and potential of deontology to approach the issue of sustainability in a different way. For such an interpretation in regard to environmental ethics, see, e.g., Palmer (1994).
- 3.
- 4.
Newton (2003) also bases her ethical discussion of sustainability on virtue ethics and offers some arguments why this is the most adequate approach.
- 5.
- 6.
These are, of course, rather specific relationships that we would not regard as relevant today. We are, therefore, not interested in the specifics Aristotle presents in regard to these relationships, but rather in his general philosophical approach and insights.
- 7.
- 8.
See, however, Sherwin (2008) for a more demanding and comprehensive programmatic call for a new kind of bioethics based on feminist relational theory. Sherwin particularly identifies the crucial ethical meaning of social institutions and organizations for issues of bioscience and argues for a public ethics that shall explicitly refer to the ethics of institutions and organizations, and its relation to individual morality.
References
Anscombe, G. E. M. (1958). Modern moral philosophy. Philosophy, 33, 1–19.
Aristotle. (1995). Politics (Books I and II) (T. J. Saunders, Trans.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Aristotle. (2000). Nicomachean ethics (R. Crisp, Ed. & Trans.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Attfield, R. (1998). Saving nature, feeding people, and ethics. Environmental Values, 7, 291–304.
Beauvoir, S. [1949](1972). The second sex (H. M. Parshley, Ed. & Trans.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Becker, C. (2003). Ökonomie und Natur in der Romantik. Das Denken von Novalis, Wordsworth und Thoreau als Grundlegung der Ökologischen Ökonomik. Marburg: Metropolis.
Becker, C. (2009). Logos und Wirtschaft bei Aristoteles. Ein dogmenhistorischer Beitrag zur Diskussion des ökonomischen Rationalitätsbegriffes. Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 95, 523–539.
Becker, C., & Manstetten, R. (2004). Nature as a you. Novalis’ philosophical thought and the modern ecological crisis. Environmental Values, 13, 101–118.
Bentham, J. [1781](1988). The principles of morals and legislation. Amherst: Prometheus.
Cafaro, P. (2001). Thoreau, Leopold, and Carson: Toward an environmental virtue ethics. Environmental Ethics, 23, 3–17.
Crisp, R., & Slote, M. (Eds.). (1997). Virtue ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Darwall, S. L. (Ed.). (2002). Virtue ethics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Held, V. (2006). The ethics of care. Personal, political, and global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. [1785](1998). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Kant, I. [1788](1998). Kritik der praktischen Vernunft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
MacIntyre, A. (1985). After virtue. London: Duckworth.
Newton, L. H. (2003). Ethics and sustainability. Sustainable development and the moral life. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Ott, K., & Thapa, P. (Eds.). (2003). Greifwald’s environmental ethics. Greifswald: Steinbecker verlag Rose.
Palmer, C. (1994). A bibliographical essay on environmental ethics. Studies in Christian Ethics, 7, 68–97.
Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Partridge, E. (Ed.). (1980). Responsibilities to future generations. Buffalo: Prometheus.
Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Rese, F. (2003). Praxis und Logos bei Aristoteles. Handlung, Vernunft und Rede in Nikomachischer Ethik, Rhetorik und Politik. Tübingen: Mohr.
Rolston, H., III. (1994). Feeding people versus saving nature? In W. Aiken & H. LaFollette (Eds.), World hunger and morality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Sandler, R., & Cafaro, P. (Eds.). (2005). Environmental virtue ethics. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Sherwin, S. (2008). Whither bioethics? How feminism can help reorient bioethics. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 1, 7–27.
Sikora, R. I., & Barry, B. (1978). Obligations to future generations. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation. New York: Random House.
Singer, P. (1993). Practical ethics (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, P. (1986). Respect for nature. A theory of environmental ethics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Warren, K. (1990). The power and the promise of ecological feminism. Environmental Ethics, 12, 125–146.
Warren, K. (Ed.). (1994). Ecological feminism. New York: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science +Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Becker, C.U. (2012). Limits and Potential of Traditional Moral Philosophy and Current Ethics – Some Arguments for the Need for a New Type of Sustainability Ethics. In: Sustainability Ethics and Sustainability Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2285-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2285-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2284-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2285-9
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)