Rachel Freeman-- 04/11 Class Reflection

    Yesterday in class we had guest speaker Dr. Balay talk to us about Environmental Ethics. I have worked with Dr. Balay and the Newport News Green Foundation on a couple different occasions and I'm taking his ethics class next semester, so it was nice to have a short introduction on what I will be learning in the class. Something that stuck out to me was all of the different ways to classify the mindsets of people when it comes to the environment and its conservation. When he was explaining the differences between them, I found myself aligning a little bit with each of them, even though I don't necessarily want to identify as anthropocentric as someone studying this topic. However, I think inherently valuing my life has a human over everything else is simply instinct, even when I know deep down that I have a responsibility to protect the environment, too. I think that I fit more into the benevolent subcategory, because I think that part of the human responsibility and obligation to the environment inherently means valuing it for everything that it provides for human life. However, this is where it kind of crosses over with holism, because I also know that everything is interconnected and dependent. This is also a topic I have studied in political science with Adam Smith's account for capitalism, in which he describes how nature would not life up to its fullest potential without humans and humans are meant to use it to their advantage, but he leaves out the other perspective that I think is equally as important. 

    I also really like that he brought up the question of whether nature should have rights like humans do, because it is a through-provoking question that makes you think critically about the supremacy of humans created by humans throughout history. It is easy for me to say that I think the environment should have certain "rights" because of how I value environmental protection on paper, but it becomes a clear issue when you compare it to human rights such as bodily autonomy. I think it is easier to argue that humans should have the right to a clean environment, but then at what cost? This argument then reverts back to to the environmental anthropocentric perspective. I don't think there will ever be an easy answer or any answer at all that everyone can come to a consensus about, so I think it is just important to have enough people in the world who take it upon themselves and their own morals to protect the environment not just for personal gain.