Integrity versus Expediency for Non-Anthropocentrists

摘要

Environmental theorists have often focused on the distinction between anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric arguments for protecting the natural world. However, in 'Anthropocentric Indirect Arguments for Environmental Protection,' Kevin Elliott (2014) suggests that mainstream understanding of this dialectic has been too simplistic. For the most part, when theorists have discussed anthropocentric arguments for protecting nature, they have focused exclusively on human benefits that could be gained directly from the integrity of the natural environment. But Elliott encourages us to also consider arguments built on benefits that could be gotten as a result of protecting the environment, though not directly from environmental quality itself.