essay questions, pt. 1 (1)
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
2500
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by smithsara273
Essay Questions Pt.1 The instructions will be posted on a separate document. However, keep in mind that you will need to incorporate the textbook into your response. 1.
Moncrief argues that White’s claim that the current ecological crisis is
a result of the teachings of the Judeo-Christian tradition is flawed. Although Moncrief appears to agree with White that the Judeo-
Christian tradition has fewer constraints on the human domination of nature, Moncrief thinks there are other factors that are more fundamental to our current ecological crisis. What is White’s argument? What is Moncrief’s rebuttal to White’s argument, and what
factors does Moncrief attribute to the cause of the ecological crisis? How might White respond to Moncrief and his claim that non-religious
factors have influenced the ecological crisis? Whose arguments do you
find most compelling, and why? Explain your answers in detail.
2.
What is our obligation, if any, to other animals, especially so-called higher animals? Should we be as concerned about their welfare as about human welfare? Do animals have rights—not to be harmed, experimented on, hunted, or eaten? Suppose I make the following claim: “Look, I like animals. I love my cat, and I really hate people who are cruel to animals. But at the end of the day human interests come first. For example, AIDS is a huge problem, and if we could make progress in the study of that disease so as to eliminate it one day by performing painful experiments on chimpanzees, rats, etc., we absolutely should.” Discuss (a) how Singer would respond to this claim, (b) how Regan would respond to this claim, (c) say which of the
two positions—pro-animal research or animal activist—you find most compelling on balance. Make sure that you carefully explain, analyze, and assess each thinker’s position on the topic at hand.
3.
Karen Warren writes, “Feminism must embrace ecological feminism if
it is to end the domination of women because the domination of women is tied conceptually and historically to the domination of nature…A responsible environmental ethic also must embrace feminism.” Given what we have read about ecofeminism (Karen Warren and Monica White), why does she make this argument? What does this mean? What is feminism (as we have defined it in class and in the readings, you may expand on this definition but please start with our source material)? What is environmentalism? Do you find this
argument compelling, and why? Must environmentalism be feminist? Must feminism be environmentalist? Explain your answers in detail. Refer to the Karen Warren and
the Monica White reading.
4.
Deep ecologists like Arne Naess claim that shallow ecology does not have the resources to solve our environmental problems. They argue we need a holistic worldview, a new vision of our relationship with nature, which anthropocentrism fails to provide. First, define anthropocentrism. Then compare deep ecology with either Bookchin’s
social ecology or Guha’s Third World environmentalist approach. How
might deep ecologists respond to Bookchin’s or Guha’s criticisms? Say
which of the positions—deep ecology, social ecology, or Guha’s Third World environmentalist approach—you find most compelling on balance. Make sure that you carefully explain, analyze, and assess each of the positions you discuss.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help