| 摘要: | 全球暖化所帶來的全球性環境議題，漸漸地改變了人們對於環境的舊有態度，該如何面對這樣轉變以及找到一個具有實用性與實踐性的倫理依據，是本文所要努力達到的目標。 本文試著就效益主義的進路，以Peter Singer的偏好效益主義與平等利益考量原則為基礎，強調所有受到行為影響的有感知能力生命之利益並不會因為身分或是距離遠近的不同，而有所差別，但是要達到這樣的結果，在目前的環境議題上是有困難的，尤其是全球暖化，個人行為影響的結果具有不確定性與滯延性，將會使這樣平等考量無法順利達成，因此，人類對於承載著種種生命的環境本身也必須有某種義務，不過這樣的義務似乎只是間接性的，對於環境本身以及其他的無感知生命或是非生命之事物則無法得出直接的義務，這是其立論上的不足。 全球暖化乃為一個具有整體性影響的環境問題，因此，我們需要的是一種講求整體論的環境倫理學，而Leopold的大地倫理正是這樣的主張，當平等考量個體的利益存在著種種困難的同時，是否我們應該如同古典效益主義一樣，追求整體利益的最大化，這樣的思考來自於大地倫理亦有的結果論特色而來，雖然效益主義與大地倫理論述上有立論上的間隙，但本文發現，當我們以效益觀點來看待大地倫理時，不但沒有衝突，而且還解決了大地倫理原則本身的「自然主義謬論」與「環境法西斯」的問題。 要達到這樣的目標，本文透過「中介嵌結法」來試著將兩者做一個理論與實踐上的結合，理論上參考了Rolston的「系統價值說」，來認清整體環境之不可抹滅的價值，以作為效益考量之前的基礎，並且認為在「一個世界」的視野之下來觀察我們行為影響時，我們將會同意大地倫理的主張；而在實踐層面上，本文主張將大地倫理原則視為一種直覺層面上的規範原則，在還沒進入效益考量之前，必須將大地倫理原則視為優先，除非有更大的效益考量進入，不然整體考量就是我們應該要重視的。 最後，更期待個人的效益考量能夠在「一個世界」的視野之下，產生一種典範轉移，為了能夠過著合乎倫理要求的生活，我們都必須對於自己的行為影響與後果做一個更具通盤性的考量，雖然這樣通盤的考量有計算上的困難，但就效益觀點來看，大地倫理就是一個值得我們努力遵守的原則。 The worldwide environmental issue which global warming causes has changed people’s traditional attitude toward the environment gradually. How to face such a change and find an ethics basis with practicability and practicality are the goals that we would work for. This thesis tries to take the approach of utilitarianism and is based on the preference utilitarianism of Peter Singer’s and the principle of equal benefit consideration. We emphasize all the benefits of conscious lives affected by one’s behavior will not make any difference because of identity and distance. It is difficult to reach such a result, especially for global warming issues. The result that personal behaviors influence has uncertainty and delinquency and makes equal consideration not easily to be reached. Therefore, people are obligatory for our environment which bears all of the lives. However, such obligation seems indirect. For the environment itself, other unconscious lives or things of no lives, we can not ask for direct obligation. This is the deficiency for this argument. Global warming is an environment issue which influences worldwide. We need an environmental ethics of stressing the whole theory, and the land ethics of Aldo Leopold is exactly such a concept, while it is difficult to consider the equal benefit for individuals, we should adopt the classical utilitarianism to pursue the maximization of whole benefits. Such thinking comes from the characteristics of consequentialism of the land ethics. Though there is a gap between the argumentation of utilitarianism and land ethic, we find that, as we view the land ethics from the aspect of benefits, there is no conflict and solve the problem of the naturalistic fallacy ' of the land ethics and ' the environmental fascist ' To reach such a goal, this thesis tries to combine both theories and practices through the methodology of connections. Then I theoretically refer to Rolston’s point of systematic value to clear the indelible value under the whole environment in order to consider the foundation before benefits. We will agree to the opinion of the land ethics to observe the influence of our behaviors under the vision of ' one world '; in practice aspect, this thesis maintains that we regard the land ethics principle as the principle of standardizing on a kind of intuition aspect. Before giving benefit consideration, we must regard the land ethics principle as top priority. Unless greater benefit consideration enters; otherwise, it is what we should pay attention to consider wholly. Finally, we expect personal benefit consideration can be ideally shifted under the vision of ' one world '. In order to live the life which conforms to the ethics demand, we must have an overall consideration. Although we have arithmetical difficulty in an overall consideration from the view of utilitarianism, land ethics is a worthy principle for us to obey. |
