A Darwinian environmental ethic?

1. A Darwinian environmental ethic?

2. Wednesday schedule • 9:30-10:15 Teaching ethical method: • Egoism, Contractarianism, Utilitarianism • 10:15-10:45 Teams: plan presentations • 10:45-11:15 Break • Presentations • 11:15-11:45 Team 1, Introductory material • 11:45-12:30 Team 2, Introduction to course • 12:45-14:00 Team 3, My interests & Report falsification • 15:00-16:00 Team 4, Plagiarism

3. Review:We are looking for a decision-making method based on an ethical theory that is: • Compatible with Darwinism • Engages students’ interests • Easy to remember and use • Consistent with human nature But the only ethical theory clearly compatible with Darwinism is nihilism.Nihilism provides no hope (no hope!) for a method of ethical decision making. The only remaining live candidate is a hybrid of Hume’s “limited sympathy:” sympathy first for self, then for family and friends and then, perhaps, for all sentient creatures.

4. A simple ethical method compatible with Darwinism? 1. MY interests: I ought always to do what is in my long-term, categorical interests. 2. OUR interests: I ought always to do what is in my profession’s best interests. Follow the rules: Respect persons and property; be honest; treat others fairly. 3. ALL interests: I ought always to do what is in the best interests of all morally considerable beings. Try to make the world a better place: Maximize the ratio of happiness over unhappiness, good over evil.

5. A method for making ethical decisions START HERE: What are the facts? Which of my interests might be harmed? What courses of action are open to me? 3 1 1. MY interests What course of action is best for me in the long run? 3. ALL interests How do we maximize the happiness of all creatures -- or the ratio of all desires & interests satisfied over interests unsatisfied? 2 2. OUR interests What course of action is best for us in the long run? How does our profession respect the implicit and explicit promises made to each other?

6. My interests Egoism -- the good is whatever is in my own interests. No problem here overcoming student apathy; they are all interested in getting what they want. Egoism acknowledges fact of moral diversity; we each have our own interests. Practical advice: Focus on my ultimate long-term goals & take steps necessary to attain them. Weaknesses: counterintuitive (does not seem like morality); arbitrarily prejudiced toward one person’s interests (namely, mine); and impossible to follow if others do not fulfill their roles.

7. Our interests Contractarianism -- the good is whatever is freely agreed upon in freely enacted contracts, implicit or explicit. No problem here explaining why we should respect others: we have voluntarily chosen, agreed to, such behavior. Contractarianism acknowledges the differences between persons. Practical advice: I should always do what I have promised to do. Weaknesses: Only counts contractors as part of the moral circle, but some sentient beings who cannot contract with us may nonetheless be harmed by our actions.

8. All interests Utilitarianism -- the good is whatever maximizes the ratio of happiness over unhappiness. No problem here explaining why we should respect animals and future generations: they are sentient and our actions may cause them to be happy or to suffer. Assign like interests equal weight, whoever’s interests they are. Utilitarianism acknowledges our altruistic impulse to minimize pain and maximize happiness. Practical advice: Improve the world. Weaknesses: Counts all individuals equally, seems to underplay the greater importance of those nearest and dearest to us.

9. Policy implications? Nihilism There are no ethically correct environmental policies Egoism, Contractarianism, Utilitarianism Since animals’ interests count equally with humans, utilitarianism may produce the same policies as biocentrism and ecocentrism. The Convergence Hypothesis: Different theories have similar practical implications for policies (preserve wilderness, prevent global warming, etc.) - Bryan Norton, Toward Unity Among Environmentalists (1991) - Ben Minteer, ed., Nature in Common? (2009)

10. Course overview

13. Wednesday schedule • 9:30-10:15 Teaching ethical method: • Egoism, Contractarianism, Utilitarianism • 10:15-10:45 Teams: plan presentations • 10:45-11:15 Break • Presentations • 11:15-11:45 Team 1, Introductory material • 11:45-12:30 Team 2, Introduction to course • 12:45-14:00 Team 3, My interests & Report falsification • 15:00-16:00 Team 4, Plagiarism

14. Team #1 11:15 - 11:45 0.0 Introductory material • Natalia Khafizova, leader • Dmitriy Yermakov • Elena Kunderevich • Zhanna Chashina • Maxim Olenichev • Andrey Prokofiev, adviser

15. Team #2 11:45 - 12:30 1.0 Introduction to course • Sergey Sprinchan, leader • Nurgul Osmonova • Yulia Shichanina • Dmitriy Plakhotnyuk • Andrey Sychov, adviser

16. Team #3 12:45 – 14:00 1.0 My interests and 1.3 Report falsification • Mariya Rohozha, leader • Irina Abdrashitova • Serhiy Volkovinsky • Anna Guseva • Natalia Kalinina • Ludmila Loginovska • Ruben Apressyan, adviser

17. Team #4 15:00 – 16:00 1.4 Avoid plagiarism • Ekaterina Koval,leader • Dmitriy Manakov • Elena Akkash • Boronnikova Vilena • M. Martynova, adviser

18. The OpenSeminarin Environmental Research EthicsObjectiveTo welcome Russian humanities and social sciences students into the community of environmental researchers.

19. FINAL STEPS • Team leaders: 1. Send draft to all authors and translators (those who have contributed substantive ideas and/or written comments) for review. 2. After all have approved, send to me for posting on website. • Everyone: 3. Send me an email gcomstock@ncsu.edu a. Do you want your name to appear on the OSERE home page? b. Do you want to open a section for your students?