Agenda
- Module 1: Moral status
- Baxter, "People or Penguins" (1974)
- Discuss Reading Responses
Module 1: Moral status
When we're making environmental decisions, which beings have moral status?
- We have obligations to X
- X matters for its own sake
- X has intrinsic or inherent value
- X has rights
- X has to be treated justly and fairly
"X doesn't have moral status" means...
- None of the above apply
- But perhaps X is valuable to us or a resource for us or we just enjoy X
Candidates for moral status (right)
William Baxter, "People or Penguins" (1974)
Position: when we're making environmental decisions, we should only take into account people (anthropocentrism)
- Decisions about pollution
- Decisions about the use of DDT
- Today he might focus on: decisions about climate change, wildfires, land use, etc.
- 1940s: DDT is pesticide with agricultural and household uses; also used to kill mosquitos and prevent malaria
From Doomsday for Pests (1946), a Sherwin-Williams promotional video
- 1962: Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, DDT harmful to humans and wildlife
- 1970: Richard Nixon signs bill creating the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
- 1972: EPA banned DDT, citing effects on humans as well as wildlife
- 1974: William Baxter (law professor) wrote the book People or Penguins: The Case for Optimal Pollution
- Why penguins? DDT residues found in Antarctic Adelie penguins (1966, 2008)
- So Baxter is protesting, saying "only people really matter"
What is an argument?
- Not just a controversial claim
- Argument = reasoning FROM premises TO aconclusion
Finding Baxter's argument that people matter, NOT penguins
The four criteria (all concerning people)
Why it's fine that the criteria are entirely people-centered--6 arguments
Which of the arguments are good (if any)?
Doing RRs