Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Utilitarian ethics is limited to attributing intrinsic va... — Carmelics
    Home/Environmental Ethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→A wider consequentialist approach may be more compatible with environmental ethics than utilitarian ethics.

    Utilitarian ethics is limited to attributing intrinsic value to pleasure or interest satisfaction.

    Environmental Ethics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Environmental Ethics

    Related

    A wider consequentialist approach may be more compatible with environmental ethi...Wider consequentialism attributes intrinsic value not only to pleasure or satisf...

    Similar

    Utilitarian ethics attributes intrinsic value only to the experience o...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Environmental Ethics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    94%
    Utilitarian ethics evaluates actions based on the balance of pleasure ...86%
    Environmental ethics requires attributing moral concern to non-sentien...80%
    The morally relevant object of concern is the satisfaction of importan...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: ethics-environmental
    View source passageHide passage
    As the utilitarian focus is the balance of pleasure and pain as such, the question of to whom a pleasure or pain belongs is irrelevant to the calculation and assessment of the rightness or wrongness of actions. Hence, the eighteenth century utilitarian Jeremy Bentham (1789), and later Peter Singer (1993), have argued that the interests of all the sentient beings (i.e., beings who are capable of experiencing pleasure or pain)—including non-human ones—affected by an action should be taken equally

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective