As a starting point, I've created a simple, five step argument for my view on humanity's environmental responsibility. The first four steps are premises upon which I will elaborate to some degree over the course of this paper, and the fifth step is a conclusion that should necessarily follow from the premises if they are true.
1) Humans are currently threatening the earth's viability as a habitat for living thing.
2) Humans have a duty not to threaten the earth's viability as a habitat for living things.
3) Our duty not to threaten the viability of the earth as a habitat for living things is stronger than our duty to obey the law.
4) The exclusive use of traditional, legal attempts to change patterns of human behavior to eliminate their threat to the earth's viability as a habitat for living things is and will always be ineffective.
5) Therefore, when our duty not to threaten the earth's viability as a habitat for living things conflicts with our duty to obey the law, we ought first to satisfy the former.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CLAREMONT/oai:scholarship.claremont.edu:cmc_theses-1742 |
| Date | 01 January 2010 |
| Creators | Brown, Kris R |
| Publisher | Scholarship @ Claremont |
| Source Sets | Claremont Colleges |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | CMC Senior Theses |
| Rights | © 2010 Kris R. Brown |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds