从激进怀疑主义中拯救最后一个人:如何在没有直觉或经验证据的情况下证明自然的内在价值

IF 2.2 2区 哲学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environmental Values Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.3197/096327122x16386102424010
Alexander Pho, A. Thompson
{"title":"从激进怀疑主义中拯救最后一个人:如何在没有直觉或经验证据的情况下证明自然的内在价值","authors":"Alexander Pho, A. Thompson","doi":"10.3197/096327122x16386102424010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Toby Svoboda (2011, 2015) argues that humans cannot ever justifiably attribute intrinsic value to nature because we can never have evidence that any part of non-human nature has intrinsic value. We argue that, at best, Svoboda's position leaves us with uncertainty about whether there is intrinsic value in the non-human natural world. This uncertainty, however, together with reason to believe that at least some non-human natural entities would possess intrinsic value if anything does, leaves us in a position to acquire evidence that non-human nature has intrinsic value. We appeal to Michael Huemer's (2013) Probabilistic Reasons Principle to argue that we have direct reasons to not act in ways destructive to non-human nature, even if this reason is defeasible. Hence, if having intrinsic value just is being a source of direct reasons, it also implies that non-human nature has intrinsic value.","PeriodicalId":47200,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Values","volume":"1 1","pages":"91 - 111"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Saving the Last Person from Radical Scepticism: How to Justify Attributions of Intrinsic Value to Nature Without Intuition or Empirical Evidence\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Pho, A. Thompson\",\"doi\":\"10.3197/096327122x16386102424010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Toby Svoboda (2011, 2015) argues that humans cannot ever justifiably attribute intrinsic value to nature because we can never have evidence that any part of non-human nature has intrinsic value. We argue that, at best, Svoboda's position leaves us with uncertainty about whether there is intrinsic value in the non-human natural world. This uncertainty, however, together with reason to believe that at least some non-human natural entities would possess intrinsic value if anything does, leaves us in a position to acquire evidence that non-human nature has intrinsic value. We appeal to Michael Huemer's (2013) Probabilistic Reasons Principle to argue that we have direct reasons to not act in ways destructive to non-human nature, even if this reason is defeasible. Hence, if having intrinsic value just is being a source of direct reasons, it also implies that non-human nature has intrinsic value.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47200,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Values\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"91 - 111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Values\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3197/096327122x16386102424010\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Values","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3197/096327122x16386102424010","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Toby Svoboda(2011, 2015)认为,人类无法合理地将内在价值归因于自然,因为我们永远无法有证据表明非人类自然的任何部分具有内在价值。我们认为,充其量,Svoboda的立场给我们留下了关于非人类自然世界是否存在内在价值的不确定性。然而,这种不确定性,加上我们有理由相信,如果有什么东西具有内在价值,至少有一些非人类的自然实体会具有内在价值,这让我们能够获得证据,证明非人类的自然具有内在价值。我们援引迈克尔·休默(2013)的概率原因原理,认为我们有直接的理由不以破坏非人类本性的方式行事,即使这个理由是不可推翻的。因此,如果具有内在价值只是作为直接原因的一个来源,它也意味着非人性具有内在价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Saving the Last Person from Radical Scepticism: How to Justify Attributions of Intrinsic Value to Nature Without Intuition or Empirical Evidence
Toby Svoboda (2011, 2015) argues that humans cannot ever justifiably attribute intrinsic value to nature because we can never have evidence that any part of non-human nature has intrinsic value. We argue that, at best, Svoboda's position leaves us with uncertainty about whether there is intrinsic value in the non-human natural world. This uncertainty, however, together with reason to believe that at least some non-human natural entities would possess intrinsic value if anything does, leaves us in a position to acquire evidence that non-human nature has intrinsic value. We appeal to Michael Huemer's (2013) Probabilistic Reasons Principle to argue that we have direct reasons to not act in ways destructive to non-human nature, even if this reason is defeasible. Hence, if having intrinsic value just is being a source of direct reasons, it also implies that non-human nature has intrinsic value.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
36.40%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: Environmental Values is an international peer-reviewed journal that brings together contributions from philosophy, economics, politics, sociology, geography, anthropology, ecology and other disciplines, which relate to the present and future environment of human beings and other species. In doing so we aim to clarify the relationship between practical policy issues and more fundamental underlying principles or assumptions.
期刊最新文献
Every tree fixed with a purpose: Contesting value in Olmsted's parks On degrowth strategy: The Simpler Way perspective A social and ethical game-changer? An empirical ethics study of CRISPR in the salmon farming industry Who owns NATURE? Conceptual appropriation in discourses on climate and biotechnologies Book Review: Strange Natures. Conservation in the Era of Synthetic Biology by Kent H. Redford and William M. Adams
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1