Discussion 2 difference between intrinsic and intrumental value PDF

Preview

Summary

Professor Davis. Discussing from a personal point of view the outcome and impact of the Galveston Bay oil spill and whether or not living and non-living aspects of the environment have intrinsic value. Citations in APA format....

Description

The readings for this module discussed the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. Considering the different proposals about what sort of value objects in the natural world have, explain how you believe we should go about determining the damage that is done when an environmental disaster occurs. You can consider a real example of an event that has occurred, such as the spill of coal-cleaning chemicals into the Elk River in West Virginia that left thousands of people without water for several days, or a hypothetical event, such as imagining what might happen if the Keystone Pipeline project were completed and a huge oil spill occurred in a relatively rural area. As you explain how we should assess the damage that did or might occur, you will need to explain how you have decided which living and non-living things to count in the consideration of consequences. In your replies to others, consider whether the claims that are made imply that the value of nature is intrinsic or instrumental, and what other perspectives could be taken in the consideration of the example. Environmental disasters affect both people and wildlife as well as non-living things and important ecological systems that all living things benefit from. The controversy arises between human wellbeing and environmental wellbeing which includes any possible harm to an ecosystem service or resource we rely heavily on. In such an instance evaluation and clean-up will be swift to preserve this service or resource, and is always taken seriously when human health may be impacted. The question is: if an environmental disaster negatively impacts a species or non-living thing that has little or no instrumental value does it have the right to be preserved for its own sake (intrinsic value)? In my opinion of course it does. Based on the readings, I’ve come to agree with biocentrism.1 The environmental disaster I’m going to address here is the Galveston Bay oil spill that occurred in March of 2014. It was caused by two ships colliding. A total of 168,000 gallons of residual oil were released into the open water of the Bay, affecting migrating birds, baby shrimp, and crabs returning to the Gulf that sustain the fishery there. The only upside to this event is that the oil was heavy so it formed clumps on top of the water instead of spreading and dissolving over a large distance like light oil would. However, residual fuel oil contains a high concentration of heavy metals and PAHs, making it obviously lethal to wildlife. Local citizens were also advised not to consume any seafood that had a “hydrocarbon taste or smell” be disposed of.2 Obviously human health was a concern based on the above statement. Local fishery jobs were also at stake as the oil spill impacted the shrimp and crab population, as well as harming dolphins and turtles. The oil also killed over 300 birds in just two weeks.3 A lot of people were initially concerned about the oil sinking to the bottom of the Gulf, surely killing many of the species down there that support the local fisheries. Secondary concerns went to the local wildlife, mainly the birds like terns, skimmers, and pelicans. However, the spill wasn’t labeled a “big toxic event” due to the nature of the type of oil, coastal geography that helped contain the spill, and the relative ease of clean up. Long-term concerns lie with future affects to tuna and other predatory species as toxins build up in higher levels of the food chain.4 I think the situation was assessed and proceeded as expected, with the health of humans coming first, job security and money losses second, and wildlife concerns last. This is one of

those situations that protecting where the money comes from benefits other wildlife as well. The shrimp and crabs have instrumental value to people which set into effect a fast clean-up, which also benefited other wildlife species. I probably would’ve reacted the same as saving the instrumental species helps all the others too. I would place more value on the long-term impacts of oil, though, as not too many people seemed concerned about it based on the article due to the ease the oil was cleaned up. It will continue to affect species for years to come and, through extension, humans as well. 1. Ronald Sandler, “Intrinsic Value, Ecology, and Conservation,” Nature Education

Knowledge 3(10):4, (Northeastern University, 2012), http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/intrinsic-value-ecology-andconservation-25815400. 2. Greg Harman, “Assessing the Damage from the Galveston Bay Oil Spill,” (The Texas Observer, 2014), https://www.texasobserver.org/assessing-the-damage-from-thegalveston-bay-oil-spill/. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. Bibliography Sandler, Ronald. “Intrinsic Value, Ecology, and Conservation.” Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):4. (Northeastern University, 2012). http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/intrinsic-value-ecology-andconservation-25815400 Harman, Greg. “Assessing the Damage from the Galveston Bay Oil Spill.” (The Texas Observer, 2014). https://www.texasobserver.org/assessing-the-damage-from-the-galveston-bay-oilspill/....