On The Possibility Of Non-anthropocentrism

As a totally new moral theory, whether non- anthropocentrism could come into existence is still the most fundamental theoretical issue in ecological ethics up to now. In order to solve this problem, we should give a reasonable and explicit definition on the concept of"anthropocentrism"and"non- anthropocentrism"first.Anthropocentrism insists that human is the unique subject; meanwhile, non-anthropocentrism believes that there is an ethical dimension in the relationship between human and nature. According to this, the essence of the anthropocentrism can be regarded as a kind of crankiness in absolute subjectivity. And non-anthropocentrism is an attempt of correcting this crankiness. Whether non- anthropocentrism could come into existence lies on the concepts"nature's intrinsic value"and"nature right". The fundamental point of the rationality of the argument of"nature has intrinsic value"is that it can be coincident with the logic of the rationality of the argument of"human has intrinsic value", that is,"that X is the subject is the sufficient and necessary condition of that X has intrinsic value."According to the Humean question of distinguishing"fact"from"value", the nature's intrinsic value should be ascribed to the category of"fact", while the nature right to the category of"value". On the other hand, being in certain ethical community, which takes the intrinsic value as its essential qualification, is the sufficient and necessary condition of a subject has certain moral right. The existence of nature's intrinsic value indicates that there should be an ethical relationship between human and nature, the concept of"nature right"does exist and has its validity.This is a powerful prove on the legitimacy of the non- anthropocentrism...