Value in Nature and the Nature of Value

Rolston, Holmes

doi:10.1017/s1358246100006421

Cited by 64 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Species possess many different types of value: ecological value to the systems in which they are located (e.g., performing ecosystem functions); instrumental values to people (e.g., providing ecosystem services); and intrinsic value (or final value) in themselves or for what they are (e.g., as distinctive forms of life) (Rolston , ; Callicott ; Hunter ; Sandler ). As a result, species extinctions involve a loss of value from the world.…”

Section: Ethical Arguments In Favor Of Deep De‐extinctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethics of Reviving Long Extinct Species

Sandler

2013

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There now appears to be a plausible pathway for reviving species that have been extinct for several decades, centuries, or even millennia. I conducted an ethical analysis of de-extinction of long extinct species. I assessed several possible ethical considerations in favor of pursuing de-extinction: that it is a matter of justice; that it would reestablish lost value; that it would create new value; and that society needs it as a conservation last resort. I also assessed several possible ethical arguments against pursuing de-extinction: that it is unnatural; that it could cause animal suffering; that it could be ecologically problematic or detrimental to human health; and that it is hubristic. There are reasons in favor of reviving long extinct species, and it can be ethically acceptable to do so. However, the reasons in favor of pursuing de-extinction do not have to do with its usefulness in species conservation; rather, they concern the status of revived species as scientific and technological achievements, and it would be ethically problematic to promote de-extinction as a significant conservation strategy, because it does not prevent species extinctions, does not address the causes of extinction, and could be detrimental to some species conservation efforts. Moreover, humanity does not have a responsibility or obligation to pursue de-extinction of long extinct species, and reviving them does not address any urgent problem. Therefore, legitimate ecological, political, animal welfare, legal, or human health concerns associated with a de-extinction (and reintroduction) must be thoroughly addressed for it to be ethically acceptable.

show abstract

Section: Ethical Arguments In Favor Of Deep De‐extinctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethics of Reviving Long Extinct Species

Sandler

2013

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is logically distinct from extrinsic value, which we find in something without reference to instrumental needs. 'Tourists in Yosemite', for instance, 'do not value the sequoias as timber but as natural classics, for their age, strength, beauty, resilience and majesty' [49]. This much is clear.…”

Section: The Axiological Dimension Of Teleologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethics and Ontology of Synthetic Biology: a Neo-Aristotelian Perspective

Coyne

2019

Nanoethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is concerned with two interrelated questions: what, if anything, distinguishes synthetic from natural organisms, and to what extent, if any, creating the former is of moral significance. These are ontological and ethical questions, respectively. As the title indicates, I address both from a broadly neo-Aristotelian perspective, i.e. a teleological philosophy of life and virtue ethics. For brevity's sake, I shall not argue for either philosophical position at length, but instead hope to demonstrate their legitimacy through their explanatory power. I firstly argue that synthetic organisms differ in kind from natural organisms and machines, and differ only by degree from genetically modified organisms. I then suggest that this is nevertheless sufficient to give us specific ethical reservations about synthetic biology: namely, that more than any other widely used biotechnology, it is characterised by a drive to mastery that stands opposed to due appreciation of the giftedness of life. Keywords Synthetic biology. Virtue ethics. Aristotle. Teleology. Philosophy of technology. Hans Jonas The Bifurcation of Nature Synthetic biologists seek, broadly speaking, to create novel organisms using standardised biological parts and in accordance with engineering principles. The present analysis of synthetic biology will begin with the ontological question of what kind of beings synthetic organisms are, arriving at an answer by drawing comparisons with machines, natural organisms (henceforth 'organisms'), and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). First of all, therefore, we must define these entities, so as to clearly distinguish between them. To some this might seem unnecessary. In fact it is anything but: not only do biologists and philosophers of science frequently describe organisms in mechanistic terms for heuristic purposes (which we might excuse), but many also go further and suggest that organisms actually are a kind of machine [1]. This ontological claim is, I believe, wholly erroneous and serves to undermine ethical analysis concerning both human and non-human life. This misconception has a long and distinguished philosophical pedigree, however, stretching back at least as far as Descartes. Dividing the cosmos into res extensa and res cogitans, or 'extended' and 'intelligent' substances [2], Descartes' ontology promoted a theoretical 'bifurcation of nature' [3]. 1 The former substance, res

show abstract

“…As he sees it, a species does not represent the reproduction of individuals but the persistence of a process—the successful know‐how of living in relation to other unfolding processes. “The species defends a particular form of life,” Rolston proposes, “pursuing a pathway through the world, resisting death (extinction), by regeneration maintaining a normative identity over time.”…”

Section: Everything But the Sum Of Partsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reclaiming Hope in Extinction Storytelling

Kohl¹

2017

Hastings Center Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Critics often take conservationists to task for delivering a constant barrage of bad news without offering a compelling vision of the future. Could recent advances in synthetic biology—an optimistic, forward‐looking field with a can‐do attitude—let conservationists develop a new vision and generate some better news? Synthetic biology and related gene‐editing applications could be used to address threats to species. Genetic interventions might also be used in plants to better protect biodiversity in U.S. rangelands and forests. One possibility has stood out in its ability to capture media attention and the public imagination—recreating extinct species. And perhaps a de‐extinction story could counter the seemingly relentless negativity in biodiversity talk. De‐extinction proponent Stewart Brand writes that resurrecting species could shift the “conservation story … from negative to positive, from constant whining and guilt‐tripping to high fives and new excitement.” So, why do many people in conservation oppose the de‐extinction narrative? This essay is an inquiry into whether there are intrinsic social reactions to these types of conservation solutions that might offset their potential benefits. If genetic tools are to be applied to address conservation issues in a realistic and responsible way, their broader social‐cultural implications deserve far more attention than they have so far received.

show abstract

Value in Nature and the Nature of Value

Abstract: I offer myself as a nature guide, exploring for values. Many before us have got lost and we must look the world over. The unexamined life is not worth living; life in an unexamined world is not worthy living either. We miss too much of value.

Cited by 64 publications

References 5 publications

The Ethics of Reviving Long Extinct Species

The Ethics of Reviving Long Extinct Species

The Ethics and Ontology of Synthetic Biology: a Neo-Aristotelian Perspective

Reclaiming Hope in Extinction Storytelling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About