Environmental Ethics: Libertarian vs. Ecological Extension

SUMMARY of the major issues, concepts, and distinctions relevant to the contemporary moral issue 

Environmental ethics describes a philosophy that is majorly concerned with the ethical relationship that exist between human beings and natural resources. According to Pojman, McShane and Pojman (2015), the philosophy has developed over years due to the need for environmental care, factoring the increasing rate industrialization, population growth, economic expansion, and technological advancement. The factors mentioned are considered immediate triggers to the development of environmental ethics due to their connection with pollution effects, depletion of natural resources, degradation of ecosystems, redundant plant and animal biodiversity and climate change ( Stenmark, 2017) . Therefore, the philosophy of environmental ethics primarily focuses on the moral obligation of human beings to take care of the environment and why they should do that. 

Therefore, the question of the role of human beings in environmental care can be answered through evaluation of radical ecology and extended moral standing. Human beings contend with several ethical decisions regarding the environment every day. The decisions surround actions to whether proceed with deforestation for the sake of human consumption, continue to manufacture vehicles powered by gasoline, produce nuclear energy, and cause extinction of special species for the sake of humanity convenience, and generally using available environmental space conservatively while expanding life ( Pojman et al., 2015) . There exists three key ethical approaches according to works done by famous environmental ethics professionals and researchers: Libertarian extension, ecologic extension, and conservation ethics ( Fournier, 2016) . The extensions explain the different approaches human beings take concerning the environment and their own needs. The environment needs to be taken care of to support future generations, but at the same time, human beings need to survive through utilizing the natural resources provided by the environment ( Thompson, 2017) . Therefore, this situation puts them in an ethical dilemma, which they tend to react to in different ways. Marshall described the different ways using the three approaches above. 

DISCUSSION of at least two (2) competing/opposing viewpoints in the contemporary debate on your selected moral issue 

Libertarian extension focuses on a civil liberty approach whereby, there is commitment to allocate all members of a community with equal rights; this includes both human beings and non-humans. All ontological entities have ethical worth based on the fact that they exist, according to Andrew Brennan. Therefore, as Fournier (2016) noted, every action taken by human beings should be directed towards fostering equal treatment of fellow humans and other non-human creatures or objects that exist in the ecosystem; this includes water resources, trees, and animals. For instance, forests and the need for human settlement all have an equal right to be taken care of, hence, every action should balance the welfare of humans and the forest. Libertarian extension also states that the environment is valuable in itself, a concept that is refereed to as deep ecology: deep ecology supports proper care of the environment for the worth that it holds, thus, making it just as valuable as human beings ( Stenmark, 2017) . Expanding the circle of moral worth, should be reorganized to encompass rights of non-human animals, and not adhering to this should be considered an act of speciesism ( Fournier, 2016) . Segregation of species existing within an environment on the basis of human or non human is not logical, because the status of being human does not in any way make human beings superior to other members of an environment. This approach therefore, subjects human beings to fair treatment pf the environment; that is, the same way they would treat other fellow humans. 

Ecological extension ethical approach focuses on the fundamental interdependence of all biological objects and their important diversity. Ecological extension perfectly reflects the natural world from a scientific perspective. The approach discusses the intrinsic value of all entities found in a particular ecosystem or the global environment as a single entity. The approach puts emphasis on the theory that the earth changes its geo-physiological structure over time to e sure that balance is maintained between both organic and inorganic matter Therefore, the approach supports the libertarian approach in the sense that both agree that human beings hold no superior significance compared to the matter in the long run ( Pojman et al., 2015) . This approach therefore takes into consideration both the welfare of human beings and that of non humans in an environment; if there is need to create space for population settlement, for instance, shelter is created in harmony with existence of trees. 

Conservation ethics approach to environmental ethics extends the use-value into the non human biological world. The approach focuses on the environmental worth in terms of its utility and worth to the human beings ( Wiens & Hobbs, 2015) . The approach is an opposite of the intrinsic value of the deep ecology theory, and rather focuses on shallow ecology approach whereby the entities in an environment have an extrinsic value instead ( Stenmark, 2017) . Therefore, the environment should be preserved based on its extrinsic value, and how useful it is to the human beings. The approach hence considers the welfare of human kind more than that of other beings or entities. Additionally, the approach also considers the welfare of future generations and environmental sustainability ( Tännsjö, 2013) . Human actions based on securing a life for inter-generations come first before actions to secure the environment. For instance, if space is needed for settlement, at the expense of clearing trees, the action should be taken. 

Evaluation and explanation of which of the alternative viewpoints you personally favor or embrace 

Ecological extension approach of environmental ethics is the most favorable. Based on scientific reasoning, the approach embraces the interdependence of biological entities in a given ecosystem. Whether human or non human, each entity depends on the other's existence to exist; for instance, human beings depend on the existence of plants and animals for food, and shelter; plants depend on humans and animals for waste sensible for their healthy growth, animals depend on humans and other animals, and plants for food. The level of interdependence makes each member of an ecosystem an equal partner in an environment, hence not requiring any special treatment or priority. However, as Tännsjö (2013) affirmed, this approach may not really be effective in a real world situation since the need for existence of human beings may surpass that of other entities by a given margin. Therefore, the best approach would entail balancing ecological extension with moderation: in situations where human survival outweighs the existence of other non human entities, necessary decisions should be taken appropriately. 

References 

Fournier, T. (2016). Will my next car be a libertarian or a utilitarian?: Who will decide?.  IEEE Technology and Society Magazine ,  35 (2), 40-45. 

Pojman, L. P., McShane, K., & Pojman, P. (2015).  Environmental ethics: Readings in theory and application . Nelson Education. 

Stenmark, M. (2017).  Environmental ethics and policy-making . Routledge. 

Tännsjö, T. (2013). Environmental Ethics. In  Understanding Ethics (pp. 128-141). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g0b1qd.11 

Thompson, P. B. (2017).  The spirit of the soil: Agriculture and environmental ethics . Routledge. 

Wiens, J. A., & Hobbs, R. J. (2015). Integrating conservation and restoration in a changing world.  BioScience ,  65 (3), 302-312.