The intrinsic value of nature

160 Pages·1997·34.027 MB·English

by  Leena Vilkka

EDITORIAL FOREWORD
Leena Vilkka takes us on a critical journey through the forest of distinctions and
theories that treat life and nature in terms of values. Such values have been variously
proposed as intrinsic, inherent, instrumental, immediate, inherited, absolute,
derivative, self-generated, objective, subjective, experiental, personal, biological,
social, natural, or global. To this proliferation of ideas, Vilkka brings systematic
order and sensitive appraisal. She defines the positions, charts their structures,
contrasts their programs, weighs their insights, and corrects their shortcomings.
Throughout the philosophical expedition, Vilkka keeps her eye on the living
matter that may evade the nets and snares of value-theory. What matters is life. Life
has many biological forms, in addition to that form which has been our central
concem as theorists and as animals, namely, humanity. Even the Earth might be
thought of as a living organism.
Often the theories of vailues elaborated by human beings that are applied to
life and to nature as a whole give priority to the human species. How could we do
otherwise? Even theories that take the extra step of arguing for the rights of other
living things may operate by extending a set of human values, as if by generosity,
to those who are not human beitigs. The movement is from human rights to the
rights of nature.
Vilkka calls for a change of persjjective so that we can appreciate the rights of
our species, along with the rights of others, as coming under the broader canopy of
the value of life. Thus, the rights of nature may give justification to our human
rights.
Vilkka is not asking us to forget our humanity. She helps us to discover a
fuller sense of what is truly valuable in life on this threatened planet.
Robert Ginsberg
Executive Editor
Value Inquiry Book Series
One
WHAT IS INTRINSIC VALUE?
1. Introduction
This book is a theoretical inquiry aimed at forming a theory of the intrinsic value of
nature. It provides philosophical arguments for animal preservation and nature
preservation. The third task of the book is to persuade its readers to realize the
importance of its subject-matter. Most philosophers and scientists do not accept the
language of intrinsic value in relation to the non-human world. This book questions
two common assumptions: (1) only human beings have intrinsic value; (2) human
beings are the origin of all values. I am critical of anthropocentrism, although I
propose a form of ecohumanism, which recommends an attitude of respect for
animals and nature. The ethical goal, which I have espoused, is the well-being of thé
people on Earth and the well-being of the Earth and its diverse life forms, plants and
animals.
Intrinsic value is a notoriously difficult concept. The debate surrounding this
key concept has been confused. Among the authorities in the field of intrinsic value,
no agreement has been reached about basic terms, concepts, and ideas. Some good
books on intrinsic value exist, although the experts have different views and few
attempts have been made to reconcile their individual terminologies (like inherent
value, inherent worth). The term "intrinsic value" has become broad and imprecise.
Virtually anybody or anything can be the location of intrinsic value or the object of
intrinsic valuation: individuals, universals, and wholes, or people, animals, plants,
and ecosystems. We need to clarify and classify different forms and meanings of
intrinsic value.
The search for intrinsic or natural value is the ultimate ground of nature-
conservation philosophy. 1 Anthony Weston claims that "it becomes easy to justify
respect for other life forms and concern for the natural environment, and indeed many
of the standard arguments only become stronger, once the demand to establish
intrinsic values is removed."^ I defend the contrary view: we have a substantial need
to prove the assumption that the natural world is of worth in itself.3 Intrinsic value
in nature is the most fascinating problem of nature-conservation philosophy from
the theoretical point of view. The position that we should not attempt to establish
the intrinsic value of nature cannot be successful from a practical point of view. We
do need a notion of intrinsic value to justify environmental policy for treating the
non-human world. Several instrumental human interests occur in the environment:
economic, ecological, scientific, religious, cultural, aesthetic, and leisure interests.
Non-instrumental human interests in nature are also strong. The willingness of
nature activists to preserve nature for its own sake should not be ignored in
4 What Is Intrinsic Value?
environmental practice and theory. We need the intrinsic-value view of nature to
form a complete frame of nature's values.
The basic interests of this book concern animals (other than human beings),
living beings, and ecosystems. I offer a naturistic (nature-istic) argument. A
humanistic (human-istic) approach would be at stake, if the topics of human beings
were made central. My argument is based on the classification between
naturocentrism and naturogenic value. Anthropogenic value in nature is a form of
value generated by human beings and centered on nature. Naturogenic value is
generated by nature. The argument has three components: (1) the ethical and
ontological types of intrinsic value in nature (zoocentric and zoogenic value,
biocentric and biogenic value, ecocentric and ecogenic value), (2) the specific ideals
of intrinsic values (well-being, biodiversity, and beauty), and (3) the generic levels
of value in nature (consciousness, livingness, and wholeness). I argue that animals
and nature have sufficient intrinsic value that in decision contexts animals and nature
should win, since their values have priority over human values.
This book is divided into three parts. Part I develops basic concepts and
distinctions of intrinsic value. In Part 11, basic nature-centered concems are discussed
in detail. Part III is focused to three themes: the origin of value, the problem of
priorities between human and natural value, and rights for animals and nature. The
purpose of Chapter One is introductory. It defines the basic distinctions and issues
posed by the problems of the intrinsic value of nature. In Chapter Two, I distinguish
between intrinsic, instrumental, and systemic goodness in nature. Chapter Three
continues the classification of intrinsic value in terms of good. Four basic groups
are: 1. intrinsic value in terms of experienced-value, 2. intrinsic value in terms of
ends-value and of self-value, 3. the group of subjective intrinsic value (subject-
centered intrinsic value), and 4. the group of objective intrinsic value (object-centered
intrinsic value). Finally, intrinsic value is understood in terms of respect and love
for animals and nature. Activists on behalf of animals and of nature express their
willingness to preserve nature for its own sake by using the language of intrinsic
value.
Part II concentrates on three basic topics of nature: animals, life, and nature as
a whole. Chapter Four offers the animal-centered philosophy called zoocentrism. I
focus on animal well-being, animal subjectivity, and animals as sentient beings.
Tom Regan's concept of inherent value of sentient animals is analyzed in detail.
Chapter Five proposes the model of biocentrism, life-centered philosophy. Basic
questions are "What is life?", and "What is the intrinsic value of life?" Some old
philosophical issues of life are fruitful in the modern discussion of biodiversity. I
introduce the old principle of plenitude, and the concepts of will to live (Arthur
Schopenhauer, 1788-1860) and e'/an v;to/ (Henri Bergson, 1859-1941). The present
concept of inherent worth is a part of Paul W. Taylor's biocentrism and is examined
in detail. Taylor compares biocentrism to anthropocentrism. Biocentrism regards
respect for living nature in the same way as anthropocentrism regards respect for
Introduction 5
people. Taylor builds his theory of nature's inherent worth on the concept of the
good of each living being. His argument is roughly as follows: if an entity has a
good of its own, and if it is better that this good be realized than not be realized,
then the entity has inherent worth. For a living entity it will be better that its good
be realized than not. Thus, all living organisms have inherent worth. This includes
the moral argument that animals and plants should be treated in such a way that their
good be realized rather than not. Taylor's individualistic approach is principally
challenged by holistic nature thinkers, such as Aldo Leopold (1887-1948) and J.
Baird Callicott. Chapter Six considers ecocentrism, the philosophy of ecosystems.
Its three sub-forms are divided into anthropogenic holism (J. Baird Callicott),
biocentric holism (Lawrence Johnson), and physiocentrism (Klaus Meyer-
Abich).
In Chapter Seven, I develop my naturistic theory, in the sense of ethical and
ontological extensionism and value pluralism. I argue for the existence of intrinsic
value in nature, including the intrinsic value of consciousness, life forms, the land,
ecosystems, and the earth. This approach develops naturogenic value subdivided into
zoogenic, biogenic, and ecogenic value inhering in non-human nature independent of
human valuation. The issue of natural beauty is discussed in this chapter. Chapter
Eight discusses anthropocentric intrinsic value in nature. Weak anthropocentrists can
argue that things other than human beings have intrinsic value, albeit human worth
takes priority over the intrinsic value of nature. Ecohumanism is the promising
model of weak anthropocentrism in defending both human and natural value.
Finally, I offer three types of argument for nature's intrinsic value in relation
to rights: the conceptual points of values and rights, the ontology of intrinsic value
and moral rights, and the practical preservation utilities arising from the
relationship. In Chapter Nine, I argue that our view of the rights of animals and
nature depends on our general view of the world, whether it is anthropocentric or
naturocentric. We should extend the idea of natural rights to the rights of animals
and nature.
In recent discussions, no comprehensive book has been written against the
intrinsic-value view of nature. The present book defends the pluralism of value and
classifies basic forms of value in nature. The notion of intrinsic value related to
environmental protection is strikingly new in philosophical discussion. We even
cannot argue against the view that such values exist in nature, unless we have
suitable theories in the field. My hope is that this book inspires the discussion of
intrinsic value.