In the book there are three ideas that Koha'k talks about in the ethical perspective, these are theocentric, antropocentric, and biocentric. The idea of theocentric has to do with looking at nature as a creation of the divine, this almost makes it seem like there is a religious sense to it in that we wouldn't have anything if it wasn't for God who created all the things around us. Antropocentric has two main people that have helped with this way of thinking; Immanual Kant and Rene Descartes. With Kant he argues that it is ok to destroy nature without any reason behind it and that we have obligations because we aren't respecting our own humanity. Descartes says that nature has no mind or spirit, nature is mechanical and animals are machines. Biocentric moves away from the idea that things are valued by the way we see them.
The thoughts of these three ideas are somewhat wrong in the sense of how they view nature and how they think we should treat nature. Theocentric looks at things in a sense of religious in which that is good but there can be times when those ideas of viewing nature as a religious item canbe taking things too seriously. Antropocentric ways are wrong in that nature is mechanical and then animals are machines. Even though we cannot communicate with animals I think in some aspect you can tell if an animal is in pain or if they are sad in the sense that with dogs they whimper. To say that animals are machines is completely wrong because machines would not show these qualities they would just do nothing. With us being able to destroy without any reason is wrong because nature is important in helping our environment grow and for wildlife to have a home and a place to stay. It would be like somebody destroying our houses for no reason at all. I think that we should value nature and take some things for granted because a lot of our wildlife is diminishing and in a few years they could be gone forever.
No comments:
Post a Comment