No abstract

Alan Holland asks whether ‘sustainability’ will deliver the protection of nature. As long as it is taken to mean the extending of human welfare into the future, it may not, he argues, since this does not necessarily entail protecting nature. Holland argues against using ‘critical natural capital’ as a measure of sustainability since criticality is often regarded in anthropocentric terms. He argues instead for the protection of nature as ‘natural items themselves’, but recognizes that this objective may sometimes clash with satisfying human needs. Environmental sustainability and social justice, in other words, will not always pull in the same direction.

No abstract

It has often been thought, and has recently been argued, that one of the most profound impacts of Darwin's theory of evolution is the threat that it poses to the very possibility of living a meaningful, and therefore worthwhile, life. Three attempts to ground the possibility of a meaningful life are considered. The first two are compatible with an exclusively Darwinian worldview. One is based on the belief that Darwinian evolution is, in some sense, progressive; the other is based on the belief that the natural world is a thing of value and hence, that our lives are lived in the presence of value. The third is based on a belief in providence, and holds that we must transcend the exclusively Darwinian worldview if we are to find meaning. All three are, for different reasons, rejected. The conclusion reached is that, contrary to what has often been thought and recently argued, the impact of Darwin's theory is precisely to liberate us to lead the most meaningful of lives.

No abstract