Editing Environmental ethics (section)

== Anthropocentrism ==
{{main article|Anthropocentrism}}

Anthropocentrism is the position that humans are the most important or critical element in any given situation; that the human race must always be its own primary concern. Detractors of anthropocentrism argue that the Western tradition biases homo sapiens when considering the environmental ethics of a situation and that humans evaluate their environment or other organisms in terms of the utility for them (see [[speciesism]]). Many argue that all environmental studies should include an assessment of the intrinsic value of non-human beings,<ref>Singer, Peter. "''Environmental Values.'' ''The Oxford Book of Travel Stories''. Ed. Ian Marsh. Melbourne, Australia: Longman Cheshire, 1991. 12-16.</ref> which would entail a reassessment of humans ecocultural identities.<ref>Milstein, T. & Castro-Sotomayor, J. (2020). Routledge Handbook of Ecocultural Identity. London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351068840</ref> In fact, based on this very assumption, a philosophical article has explored recently the possibility of humans' willing extinction as a gesture toward other beings.<ref>[http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol7no3_2008/kochiordan_argument.pdf Tarik Kochi & Noam Ordan, "An Argument for the Global Suicide of Humanity". ''Borderlands'', 2008, Vol. 3, 1-21] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090915064300/http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol7no3_2008/kochiordan_argument.pdf |date=2009-09-15 }}.</ref> The authors refer to the idea as a [[thought experiment]] that should not be understood as a call for action.

[[Baruch Spinoza]] reasoned that if humans were to look at things objectively, they would discover that everything in the universe has a unique value. Likewise, it is possible that a human-centred or anthropocentric/androcentric ethic is not an accurate depiction of reality, and there is a bigger picture that humans may or may not be able to understand from a human perspective.

[[Peter Vardy (theologian)|Peter Vardy]] distinguished between two types of anthropocentrism.<ref>Peter Vardy and Paul Grosch (1999), ..The Puzzle of Ethics.., p. 231.</ref> A strong anthropocentric ethic argues that humans are at the center of reality and it is right for them to be so. Weak anthropocentrism, however, argues that reality can only be interpreted from a human point of view, thus humans have to be at the centre of reality as they see it.

Another point of view has been developed by Bryan Norton, who has become one of the essential actors of environmental ethics by launching environmental pragmatism, now one of its leading trends. Environmental pragmatism refuses to take a stance in disputes between defenders of anthropocentrist and non-anthropocentrist ethics. Instead, Norton distinguishes between ''strong anthropocentrism'' and ''weak-or-extended-anthropocentrism'' and argues that the former must underestimate the diversity of instrumental values humans may derive from the natural world.<ref>[http://journals.openedition.org/sapiens/88 Afeissa, H. S. (2008). "The Transformative value of Ecological Pragmatism. An Introduction to the Work of Bryan G. Norton". ''S.A.P.I.EN.S.'' '''1''' (1).]</ref>

A recent view relates anthropocentrism to the future of life. Biotic ethics are based on the human identity as part of gene/protein organic life whose effective purpose is self-propagation. This implies a human purpose to secure and propagate life.<ref name="Bioethics" /><ref name="Seeding Book" /> Humans are central because only they can secure life beyond the duration of the Sun, possibly for trillions of eons.<ref>{{Cite journal | last = Mautner |first = Michael N. | title = Life in the cosmological future: Resources, biomass and populations  | journal = Journal of the British Interplanetary Society | year = 2005 | volume = 58 | pages = 167–180 | url=http://www.astro-ecology.com/PDFCosmologyJBIS2005Paper.pdf |bibcode = 2005JBIS...58..167M }}</ref> Biotic ethics values life itself, as embodied in biological structures and processes. Humans are special because they can secure the future of life on cosmological scales. In particular, humans can continue sentient life that enjoys its existence, adding further motivation to propagate life. Humans can secure the future of life, and this future can give human existence a cosmic purpose.<ref name="Bioethics" /><ref name="Seeding Book" />