当代世界环境伦理学理论之比较  

A Comparison of the Theories of Modern World Environmental Ethnics

作　　者：林红梅[1] 

机构地区：[1]辽宁工程技术大学政法系,辽宁阜新123000

出　　处：《学术交流》2006年第3期121-124,共4页Academic Exchange

摘　　要：目前,环境伦理学已经形成了一套相当独特的理论,按照其道德关怀和调节的范围从人与人的关系扩大到人与动植物、人与大自然的关系的顺序来看,它可以分为:人类中心论、动物中心论、生物中心论和生态中心论。其中,动物中心论主张关怀动物的苦乐感受,生物中心论则将其道德考虑扩及所有的生命,生态中心论则要求人类“像山那样思考”,虚己而统观自然。作为个体主义的环境伦理学,动物中心论认为所有的动物都是平等的,是否应该受到保护与该动物所属的物种无关,也与该动物所属物种的个体数量的多少无关。如果感受能力相等的话,它们受到的道德关怀就应该相等。整体主义的大地伦理理论正好相反,它以物种的濒危程度和对生态系统的贡献为标准。濒危物种的个体对该物种的存续和整个生态系统的意义更大,因此更值得重视。动物解放主义和大地伦理学虽然同属于环境伦理学,但它们在理论上和实践上都是完全不同的。At present, environmental ethics has become a quite sound unique theory. In the view of the sequence of ethical concerning and adjusted scope, from the relation of man and man, of man and animals and plants, to that of man and nature, it can be classified into anthropocentric theory, animalcentered theory, biocentrism and ecocentrisrn. Animal＇centered theory holds one shows concern for the feelings of animals; creature-centered theory extends the concern to all living beings; ecology-centered theory requires one should think as a mountain does, examining nature by decreasing his individuality. Animal llberation/rights theory, a individualistic environmental ethics, considers all animals have equal rights, whether they should be protected is no connection with the species they belong to and with the number of individuals of the species. If acquired with the same sensibility, they also should be concerned with equal morals. In the contrast, holistic land ethics takes the imminent danger level and contribution to ecosystem as basic criteria. The survival of individual endangered species has a great meaning for the survival of their species as well as for the whole ecosystem, thus deserving much attention. Although they fall into environmental ethics, animal liberation and land ethnics differ in theory and practice.

关 键 词：环境伦理学 动物中心论 生物中心论 大地伦理理论 

分 类 号：B82[哲学宗教—伦理学]