Content area
Full text
Patrick Curry. Ecological Ethics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005.
DOI: 10.1177/1086026607309400
Patrick Curry has attempted the uncommon: to produce a book that simultaneously acts as an undergraduate primer in environmental ethics while also remaining sensitive to the concerns of those who are likely his most enthusiastic disciples. He attempts this feat by revealing his political agenda early on. He explains in his introduction that he does not intend to provide a rigorous analysis of the many views in the environmental corpus but, more stunningly, that he starts "from the belief, or perception, that nature-which certainly includes humanity- is the ultimate source of all value" (p. 2). That's a bold move, and a move that I'm torn about. Following his lead, I'll lay my cards on the table in my first paragraph, or at least my second.
Although I appreciate his candor, I worry that sticking his neck out as far as he has, as early as he does, on what is arguably the most central question to the entire discipline of environmental ethics, condemns him to failure from the start. Imagine a primer on abortion ethics that proclaimed proudly in its preface that no rigorous argument would be given but that the author begins from the view that life itself is the ultimate source of all value. That's a tough pill to swallow. Nevertheless, if you can get past this gargantuan horse tranquilizer, Curry's book has its merits.
Having aired my concern, allow me to offer this defense of Curry. One reason that he may feel compelled to speak so frankly is that a great deal of work in environmental ethics has focused not only on arguing on behalf of the environment but also partly on legitimating the subject matter to other philosophers. Consequently, many texts seek redemption from academics by arguing that what they do matters to mainstream philosophers too. I take it that it is this latter concern that has Curry discounting questions about nature's value. Perhaps my defense here is mere charity, but I think it is a real problem for the branch of applied ethics now called "environmental" that it so frequently offers arguments on its own behalf. It is unfortunate that, in stating his own position so clearly, Curry...