Environmental Ethics: Rethinking Our Place in a Burning World (1)

Why does Superman have a dog? Superman has a dog because, even as an alien with extraordinary powers, he still yearns for companionship, loyalty, and a touch of normalcy—qualities a dog provides in abundance. His canine companion, Krypto the Superdog, is more than just a pet; he is a symbol of Superman’s lingering connection to his home planet, Krypton. Krypto was originally sent to Earth in a test rocket by Superman’s father, Jor-El, and later reunited with Kal-El. This superpowered dog shares many of Superman’s abilities, but more importantly, he offers unconditional affection and support, reminding Superman that even the mightiest being in the universe needs someone who loves him not for his strength, but for who he is. In a world that often places Superman on a pedestal, Krypto brings him back down to Earth—literally and figuratively.

The bond between Superman and his dog, Krypto, can surprisingly be connected to environmental issues if we look beyond the surface. At its core, their relationship reflects the idea of interdependence—how even the most powerful being needs a companion from nature to remain grounded and humane. In a world plagued by climate change, deforestation, and extinction, the presence of Krypto serves as a gentle reminder of the value of non-human life and the role animals play in emotional balance and ecological harmony. Superman, who lost his home planet due to its destruction, embodies the tragedy of environmental collapse. Through Krypto, we’re reminded that if even an alien saviour clings to the last remnants of his natural world, then we, too, should fiercely protect what little of ours remains. It’s not just about saving the planet; it’s about saving the soul of it—and that soul often has four legs and a wagging tail. 

Environmental Ethics, at its core, is the philosophical inquiry into how we ought to relate to the natural world. It demands that we question not only what we are doing to our environment, but why we are doing it, and what moral consequences arise from our choices. In an age of climate breakdown and ecological crisis, such reflection is no longer optional—it is essential.

Our current environmental challenges are not purely scientific or technical in nature. They are deeply moral, demanding a re-examination of our values, priorities, and sense of justice. Environmental Ethics calls for a shift from viewing nature as an object of use to acknowledging it as a community of life to which we belong.

In Environmental Ethics: A Very Short Introduction (2018, Oxford University Press), Robin Attfield illustrates that ethical theories and ecological concerns are deeply interwoven, as questions about how we should live inevitably extend to how we treat the natural world. He shows that classical ethical theories—such as utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics—can be expanded to address environmental issues. For instance, utilitarianism asks us to consider the consequences of our actions on the well-being of all sentient beings, which can include animals and perhaps ecosystems. Deontological approaches emphasise duties and rights, which can be extended to include duties to protect nature or to respect the rights of future generations. Virtue ethics, meanwhile, encourages the cultivation of character traits such as humility, responsibility, and care—qualities that foster ecological awareness and stewardship. Attfield argues that these theories must evolve to confront the unprecedented scale of human impact on the environment. Thus, ethical reasoning becomes a vital compass for navigating climate change, biodiversity loss, and environmental injustice, urging humanity to rethink its place in the web of life.

Attfield carefully examines the moral relationship between human beings and the natural world by exploring four central and interconnected debates: intrinsic value in nature, sustainable development, ecological justice, and our responsibilities to future generations. He argues that understanding our ethical obligations to the environment begins with recognising that nature may possess value independent of human use or interest. This idea of intrinsic value challenges anthropocentric views and invites us to see forests, rivers, animals, and ecosystems not merely as resources, but as entities worthy of respect in their own right.

Building on this, Attfield discusses sustainable development as a moral imperative—a way to meet present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs. This connects directly to the notion of ecological justice, which demands fairness not only among humans but also between species and ecosystems. It calls for a redistribution of environmental benefits and burdens, ensuring that the poor, the marginalised, and non-human life forms are not unfairly harmed by environmental degradation.

Attfield underscores the moral responsibility we hold toward future generations. He contends that just because future people do not yet exist, it does not mean they lack moral standing. On the contrary, the decisions we make today will shape the conditions of their lives, and therefore, we owe them a duty of care and stewardship. By weaving these ideas together, the book constructs a compelling vision of ethics that extends beyond the human community to embrace all life and the planet itself.

Environmental Ethics: An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy by Joseph R. DesJardins (2013, Wadsworth) explores the complex relationship between human beings and the natural world through the lens of moral philosophy. He provides an accessible yet comprehensive introduction to ethical theories—such as utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, and deep ecology—and examines how these frameworks inform our duties to the environment. He invites readers to critically engage with concepts such as sustainability, intrinsic value in nature, ecological justice, and intergenerational responsibility, all while situating the discussion within pressing real-world environmental dilemmas.

According to DesJardins, the relationship between human beings and nature must be re-evaluated through the moral lenses traditionally reserved for human-to-human interactions. DesJardins argues that ethical considerations should not end at the boundaries of our species; rather, they should extend to the non-human world—animals, plants, ecosystems, and the Earth itself. He challenges the anthropocentric worldview that regards nature merely as a resource for human exploitation and instead invites readers to consider whether nature possesses intrinsic value, independent of its usefulness to us. The book encourages moral reflection on our responsibilities not only toward the present generation but also toward future generations who will inherit the ecological consequences of our actions. Ultimately, it calls for a shift in moral consciousness—a movement from domination and control to stewardship, respect, and a sense of shared belonging with the natural world.

DesJardins invites readers to critically engage with core environmental concepts by weaving them seamlessly into the fabric of real-world environmental crises. Rather than treating sustainability, intrinsic value in nature, ecological justice, and intergenerational responsibility as abstract ideals, he grounds these concepts in the moral dilemmas we face daily—rising sea levels, deforestation, species extinction, climate change, and environmental degradation caused by human activities. DesJardins employs philosophical reasoning to encourage readers to question their assumptions: Is nature valuable only when it serves human needs, or does it possess worth in and of itself? Should our ethical obligations be limited to our contemporaries, or do they extend to future generations yet unborn? Through this moral inquiry, he pushes readers to reimagine our place in the natural order—not as conquerors or consumers, but as caretakers within a delicate and interdependent system. His writing provokes reflection, ethical discomfort, and ultimately, a sense of urgency that aligns philosophical theory with ecological reality.

According to DesJardins, the philosophy of the environment is the systematic exploration of how we ought to think about and relate to the natural world from a moral and conceptual perspective. It is a form of critical reflection that questions the assumptions underpinning our attitudes toward nature—whether we see it merely as a commodity, a machine, or as a living community deserving of moral respect. DesJardins argues that environmental philosophy challenges the dominant anthropocentric worldview, which places humans at the centre of all value, and instead opens the door to more ecocentric or biocentric perspectives that see value throughout the web of life. This philosophical approach not only critiques existing environmental practices but also helps shape new paradigms—ethical frameworks that prioritise sustainability, responsibility, humility, and a sense of interconnectedness with all living things. In essence, the philosophy of the environment invites us to rethink what it means to be human in a world that is shared, fragile, and finite.

In A New Environmental Ethics: The Next Millennium for Life on Earth (2012, Routledge), Holmes Rolston III argues that the environmental crises facing humanity require a radical rethinking of our moral obligations—not only to other humans but to the entire biosphere. He challenges readers to expand their ethical horizons beyond anthropocentric concerns and to consider the intrinsic value of all life forms, ecosystems, and evolutionary processes. Rather than treating nature as a resource for human consumption, he encourages a philosophical transformation where the Earth is respected as a community to which we belong, not a commodity we possess.

Rolston's approach is both urgent and philosophical, blending ecological science with deep moral reflection. He critiques the limitations of traditional ethical theories that focus solely on human interests, calling instead for an ethic that honours the complexity, beauty, and suffering of the natural world. Importantly, he introduces the idea that nature itself has agency and worth, independent of its usefulness to human beings. His work asks us to reflect on what kind of future we want—not just for ourselves, but for all life on Earth in the coming millennium.

We must confront the uncomfortable truth that humanity has long behaved as if Earth were an infinite warehouse of resources. This illusion has been bolstered by centuries of exploitation, colonialism, and consumer capitalism. But no system can grow indefinitely on a planet with finite resources.

This outdated worldview still informs many of our policies and economic systems. It seduces us with promises of endless growth and convenience, while hiding the costs—costs paid not only in carbon and waste, but in injustice and displacement.

The question is no longer whether we should care about the environment. The question is: why have we waited so long? Every day we delay action, we edge closer to irreversible tipping points. Ethics insists that we act not just efficiently, but justly.

Those who benefit from environmental destruction are often far removed from its consequences. Wealthy nations and corporations extract, pollute, and profit, while vulnerable communities bear the brunt of the damage—through floods, disease, and resource scarcity. Marginalised communities—especially indigenous peoples, people of colour, and low-income groups—often suffer the worst environmental harms. This is not a coincidence; it is environmental racism. It reveals how pollution and exploitation follow the lines of power and privilege.

Environmental Ethics demands that we take the idea of intergenerational justice. What right do we have to pass on a degraded planet to future generations simply for the sake of short-term gain? This is not merely an ecological concern—it is a moral failure.

Our obsession with short-term convenience—plastic packaging, fast fashion, cheap flights—must be weighed against long-term consequences. Every item we consume has an ethical footprint. To pretend otherwise is to absolve ourselves from responsibility. Recycling, though commendable, is no longer enough. Planting trees is admirable, but insufficient. True environmental ethics requires confronting the systems that make harm profitable and justice expendable. We cannot tackle environmental destruction without confronting the capitalist engine that fuels it. When growth is prioritised over justice, and profit over people, ethics is the only compass that can guide us back.

Our relationship with nature must be interrogated. Are we caretakers or conquerors? Partners or parasites? The way we answer these questions shapes not just policy, but identity.

Philosophy must descend from the ivory tower and enter the polluted rivers, the clear-cut forests, the scorched savannahs. Environmental ethics must be lived and applied, not merely theorised. It is crucial to listen to the voices often excluded from the mainstream conversation—especially indigenous knowledge keepers and grassroots activists. Their wisdom is not primitive—it is prophetic. Climate change magnifies every moral dilemma. It makes visible the consequences of our choices in time, space, and across generations. No ethical framework is complete unless it includes the climate lens.

Our ethical blind spots often stem from convenience. It is easy not to care when the pollution happens elsewhere, when the sweatshops are in another country, when the rainforest isn’t in your backyard. But ethical responsibility begins with awareness. It demands that we look closer, think harder, and feel deeper about the consequences of our lifestyles and policies. It is not enough to tell people what to do—we must cultivate moral imagination. We must be able to picture a world where the Earth is not something to exploit, but something to revere and protect.

Education is a powerful tool here. Environmental ethics must be taught not just as an abstract subject, but as a lived responsibility. In schools, in media, in public discourse. Laws must evolve to reflect moral truths. Should rivers have legal rights? Should ecosystems be granted protection not because they are useful to humans, but because they have intrinsic value? We cannot separate the ecological crisis from the social crisis. The planet is not dying in isolation—it is being killed by the same forces that oppress people: greed, domination, and indifference. The struggle for environmental justice is also the struggle for human dignity. It is a fight to ensure that no one—human or non-human—is sacrificed for someone else’s comfort. As we look ahead, the ethical path becomes clearer. We must abandon illusions of mastery and embrace humility. We must listen more than we speak, restore more than we extract. 

The question that remains is: what kind of ancestors do we want to be remembered as? Will we be the generation that chose silence, or the one that rose to responsibility? Environmental ethics urges us to break away from business as usual. It invites us to reimagine our place in the world—not as dominators, but as participants in a shared, fragile miracle. Hope lies not in naïve optimism, but in courageous accountability. If we act with moral clarity and collective resolve, we still have time to turn the tide. Ethics, ultimately, is about how we treat what we cannot replace. The Earth, once destroyed, cannot be remade. The time to act with conscience is not tomorrow—it is now.

[Part 2]

Bahasa