It is often said to be morally wrong for human beings to pollute parts of the natural environment and to consume a huge proportion of the planet’s natural resources. If that is wrong, is it simply because a sustainable environment has an instrumental value to present as well as future generations ? Or is such behaviour wrong because of the intrinsic value of the natural environment? This is what makes the subject of pollution of the environment an environment ethical dilemma and the “Super Wicked Problem” of our time.
What is the Waste Dilemma?
Paper, glass, wood, plastic and other synthetic material litter the earth from its oceans to the land. Since the Industrial Revolution, there has been a change in patterns of human consumption of natural resources. With capitalism came the culture of single use containers instead of the refillable and re-useable containers of old. different synthetic materials specifically plastic replaced paper and cloth. The naturally biodegradable materials were gradually replaced by non-biodegradable ones. Humans are said to be the most intelligent animal but it is this very intelligence that is laying waste to our environment.
Improper waste disposal has led to degradation of soil and water quality. It has also suffocated the local fauna by taking away their natural habitats and in some cases, has caused their death as well. The accumulation of waste materials on land and in water without treatment has also had a devastating impact of the local flora. Biodiversity of plants and animals has been negatively accepted. This does not bode well for our future as human population is increasing while the resources needed to keep it fed are shrinking.
What Does Science have to say?
Leopold’s “Land ethics” are applicable in this regard as man should act as a member of the community with responsibility to preserve and sustain rather than degrade the environment. The environment has an intrinsic value and it ought to be protected for its own sake. Human beings, by virtue of necessity, should utilize whatever resources they need for their vital needs but in doing so, they should respect the inherent right of all life forms, animals and plants, to co-exist peacefully on mother Earth. Man has littered the earth with his pollution since industrial age began and it is man’s responsibility to dispose of it before it irrevocably damages nature.
Arne’s “Deep Ecology” insists that humans and nature are interconnected and there needs to be a balanced relationship between the two for life to continue. This philosophy puts the onus on humanity to maintain a sustainable population in order to prevent a “Malthusian Catastrophe”.
Ecofeminism is a proponent of elimination of discrimination of all kinds for its hold life and earth to be sacred for it is consonant with the “Gaia” philosophy. Women historically have been subjugated to abuse and maltreatment by men due to wide-spread acceptance of the social construct of “female” as the weaker gender. Thus, ecofeminists have long argued and argued rightly that all life needs to be valued equally with no discrimination towards man, women, animal or plant. The right to life of all needs to be respected. pollution is in contradiction of this inherent right and it is man’s ethical responsibility to find a sustainable solution.
Conclusion:
Waste on land and water has led to pollution of water. Water is life for animals, plants and humans but this precious resource is becoming scarce due to pollution. Already the world is witness to wars fought over oil and land. If clean water and arable land availability keeps on shrinking at the present rate, the day is not far when wars will be fought over nature. As human activity has led to this problem, it is our ethical responsibility to resolve it.
