Abstract
The orthodox approach to the environment and its inhabitants is deemed to be anthropocentric in that it recognises the moral standing of human beings alone, and as such other beings are given at the most indirect moral consideration when their interests conflict with the interests of humans. However, many global environmental problems and worldwide practices directly affect not just human beings but many other creatures too. In the light of this, the anthropocentric approach has been accused by some philosophers of being too narrowly focused on human interests to creditably account for the true extent of our moral obligations. This article provides a conceptual outline of biocentrism as an alternative approach to ethics; one which widens the moral scope to include all living beings as candidates deserving moral consideration. The article also discusses how this approach might be applied to contemporary ethical issues which are international in their dimension, including environmental issues, as well as issues concerning our use of animals in worldwide human practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Attfield, R. (1994). The good of trees. In R. Attfield (Ed.), Environmental philosophy: Principles and prospects. Aldershot: Avebury (Originally published, 1981).
Attfield, R. (2014). Environmental ethics: An overview for the twenty-first century (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK/Malden: Polity.
Carson, R. (2000). Silent spring. London: Penguin Classics (Originally published 1962).
Cochrane, A. (2007). Environmental ethics. In Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at http://www.iep.utm.edu/envi-eth. Accessed 24 July 2014.
Ehrlich, P. (1968). The population bomb. New York: Ballantine Books.
Feinberg, J. (1974). The rights of animals and unborn generations. In W. T. Blackstone (Ed.), Philosophy and environmental crisis (pp. 43–68). Athens: University of Georgia.
Goodpaster, K. (1978). On being morally considerable. Journal of Philosophy, 75, 308–325.
Naess, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. Inquiry, 16(1), 95–100.
Regan, T. (2003). The case for animal rights. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press (Originally published 1983).
Rodogno, R. (2010). Sentientism, wellbeing, and environmentalism. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 27(1), 84–99.
Scherer, D. (1983). Anthropocentrism, atomism, and environmental ethics. In D. Scherer & T. Attig (Eds.), Ethics and the environment. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Singer, P. (1995). Animal liberation (2nd ed.). London: Pimlico Press (Originally published 1975).
Sterba, J. P. (2010). Kantians and utilititarians and the moral status of nonhuman life. In D. R. Keller (Ed.), Environmental ethics: The big questions (pp. 182–192). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell (Originally published 2005).
Sylvan, R. (1973). Is there a need for a new, an environmental ethic? In Proceedings of the 15th World congress of philosophy (Vol. 1, pp. 205–210). Sophia: Sophia Press.
Taylor, P. (1986). Respect for nature: A theory of environmental ethics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Further Readings
Agar, N. (2001). Life’s intrinsic value: Science, ethics, and nature. New York: Columbia University Press.
Attfield, R. (Ed.). (2008). The ethics of the environment. Farnham/Burlington: Ashgate.
Brennan, A., & Lo, Y. (2011). Environmental ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/ethics-environmental.
Varner, G. (2002). Biocentric individualism. In D. Schmidtz & E. Willott (Eds.), Environmental ethics: What really matters, what really works (pp. 108–120). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this entry
Cite this entry
Humphreys, R. (2016). Biocentrism. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09483-0_41
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09483-0_41
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09482-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09483-0
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities