环境伦理的道德基础

环境伦理的道德基础是地表空间中的人类在与周围环境进行不断地相互作用的过程中,所形成的与其他非人类生命形式相区别的根本标志。进化生物学揭示了人类文化进化的独特性,指出了文化的本质在于人的道德属性。生态学将环境伦理中"是与应当"的瓶颈难题消解于生态系统中各种存在物与其环境的交往智慧之中,从而在人类作为"道德物种"的基础上实现"人与自然在道德意义上的共同进化"[1]。     

水安全与河流道德伦理观的思考

从水安全含义出发,对陕西省水的情势和水安全问题进行了讨论。论述了河流道德伦理观,并以渭河为例说明了维护渭河健康生命需采取的措施,主要包括加强水资源统一管理、退耕还林(草)、降低潼关高程、减少渭河洪水灾害、加强渭河水环境治理、减少污水排放量、节约用水、保证生态用水、以外流域调水弥补资源性缺水、注重城乡发展、实行计划生育等。     

坚持依法治国与以德治国相结合建立完善的社会主义道德体系

江泽民总书记“以德治国”的思想 ,高瞻远瞩 ,涵义深刻。通过对社会主义道德先进性要求和广泛性要求等内容的论述 ,得出社会主义道德必须与社会主义法制相结合 ,才能建立完善的社会主义道德体系 ,依法治国与以德治国紧密结合才是建立社会主义道德体系的客观要求。     

Farming ethics in practice: from freedom to professional moral autonomy for farmers

Food production, water management, land use, and animal and public health are all topics of extensive public debate. These themes are linked to the core activities of the agricultural sector, and more specifically to the work of farmers. Nonetheless, the ethical discussions are mostly initiated by interest groups in society rather than by farmers. At least in Europe, consumer organizations and animal welfare and environmental organizations are more present in the public debate than farmers. This is not how it should be. First, because consumers often cannot but rely on agriculture. Second, because recent research shows that farmers have moral beliefs and convictions that appear to be broader than economic considerations and that are—to a certain extent—specific to their profession. This raises the question how to make input from farmers operational in the public debates on the future of farming. We discuss one option: entrusting farmers with professional autonomy concerning moral matters related to farming. We sketch the historical background of the current situation in which farmers are relatively silent on moral matters and we present some clear indications that farmers have values and moral beliefs that are relevant for the public debate. Next the concepts of professionalism and professional autonomy are discussed and applied to the practice of farming. Finally, we discuss the relevance and limits of professional moral autonomy for the agricultural profession. We close with an overview of what this moral autonomy implies for and requires from farmers in practice. We conclude that if some preconditions are met by farmers, then this type of moral autonomy can be relevant for farmers and for society, and contributes to the quality of the public debate on the future of farming.     

The ethics of biological control: Understanding the moral implications of our most powerful ecological technology

A system of environmental ethics recently developed by Lawrence Johnson may be used to analyze the moral implications of biological control. According to this system, entities are morally relevant when they possess well-being interests (i.e., functions or processes that can be better or worse in so far as the entity is concerned). In this formulation of ethical analysis, species and ecosystems are morally relevant because they are not simply aggregates of individuals, so their processes, properties, and well-being interests are not reducible to the sum of their individual members. Following Johnson's thesis, species and ecosystems have morally relevant interests in surviving and maintaining themselves as integrated wholes with particular self-identities. This theoretical structure gives rise to a number of ethical criteria that are particularly relevant to biological control, which apply to the ecosystem (the extent to which it is large, native, unique, and integrated) and to the action being considered (the extent to which it is novel, omnipresent, monitored, reversible, and necessary). In these terms, it is evident that not all biological control efforts are ethically defensible. In general terms, natural biological control is most desirable, followed by augmentative strategies, classical approaches, and finally neoclassical biological control. Two specific cases (neoclassical biological control of rangeland grasshoppers and classical biological control of prickly pear cactus) illustrate the ethical concerns. Finally, it can be shown that formalized restrictions of biological control are necessary, given the unique properties of this technology     

Biotechnology,ethics, and the structure of agriculture

The “new” agricultural biotechnologies are presently high-priority items on the national research agenda. The promise of increased efficiency and productivity resulting from products and processes derived from biotech is thought to justify the commitment to R&D. Nevertheless, critics challenge the environmental safety as well as political-economic consequences of particular products of biotech, notably, ice-nucleating bacteria and the bovine growth hormone. In this paper the critics' arguments are analyzed in explicitly ethical terms, and assessed as to their relative merits. In some cases, a principle of “do no foreseeable harm” as well as a clear determination of likely harms would force us to conclude that research, development, and diffusion of a product or process derived from biotechnology is ethically wrong. In all cases, one conclusion that can be reached is that everyone involved in research, development, marketing and adoption of biotech products is responsible for the results of their actions; thus, each individual has a responsibility to consider a broader range of values and goals that effect and are effected by the biotechnology effort.     

道德向量、动量与道德的人际生成模式分析

道德的人际生成就是不同道德向量的道德主体相互碰撞的过程和结果。道德向量是德育的逻辑起点、道德动量是最终描述道德主体道德运动变化状态的因素。从道德人际生成的模式分析中,我们知道,道德人际生成需要道德理性、权威、导向、监督与干预……而这一切正在为后现代所解构,严重制约了人际环境的育德效能的发挥。为此我们需要实施“零容忍”策略、“灌输”原则、道德权威以便重塑生态道德环境。     

Robots in agriculture: prospects,impacts, ethics,and policy

Agriculture is both the site of development of important new technologies and a key area of application of technologies developed elsewhere. It is little wonder, then, that many thinkers believe that progress in the science and engineering of robotics may soon change the face of farming. This paper surveys the prospects for agricultural robotics, discusses its likely impacts, and examines the ethical and policy questions it may raise. Along with the environmental and economic impacts of robots, political, social, cultural, and security implications of the introduction of robots that have received little attention in the larger literature on agricultural robotics are considered. Key policy choices necessary to meet the ethical challenges likely to arise as agricultural robots start to become used more widely, and to maximise the social, environmental, and economic benefits of robotics in agriculture, are highlighted.

     

大学生道德认知与道德行为脱节的对策研究

德育手段与德育内容的泛政治化倾向、对道德层次认识的模糊、道德规范实施机制缺失等等因素,直接导致了大学生道德认知与道德行为的脱节,降低了高校德育的效率.新时期,加强和改进大学生德育工作,提高高校德育的实效,关键是要在德育内容中加入"人",在德育方法上贴近学生、贴近实际,建立科学的道德评价体系,加强对道德规范遵守与执行情况的督导,促进自律与他律有机结合的良好的道德规范实施机制.     

Sustainability and the moral community

Three views of sustainability are juxtaposed with four views about who the members of the moral community are. These provide points of contact for understanding the moral issues in sustainability. Attention is drawn to the preferred epistemic methods of the differing factions arguing for sustainability. Criteria for defining membership in the moral community are explored; rationality and capacity for pain are rejected as consistent criteria. The criterion of having interests is shown to be most coherent for explaining why all living humans belong to the moral community. This criterion allows inclusion of future generations as well, and extends to animals and plants membership in the moral community. Inferences are drawn that food sufficiency advocates hold only presently living persons to be full-fledged members of the moral community, but that this view is internally inconsistent. Stewards should agree that all living things are members of the moral community. A distinction between welfare interests and ulterior interests allows the steward to include the aims of those who argue for sustainability as community without committing some of their errors. Community advocates argue that essential values and virtues will be lost is the culture of agriculture is transformed. I argue that community advocates may fail to pass on our most important virtue — justice — without such a transformation.