Deontology and Religious Ethics

Deontology is a form of ethics that states that we have certain, fundamental duties that require us to act in certain ways and to refrain from acting in others (DesJardins 274.) Kant was a firm believer in deontology. Kant had the idea that we can only be held responsible for what we have control over. That idea operates under the assumption that we are rational beings, that we make conscious decisions and act on them. Kantian ethics has a strong anthropocentric emphasis. Those who follow deontological theory of ethics believes that humans are not a means to an end; rather, humans are the end.

In that sense, deontological ethics gives more value to humans in that we look at the individual as someone of more importance than simply a player in a game. It has an anthropocentric emphasis when it concerns nature. Whatever happens on the way to the end, needs to be to benefit humans. An example of that would be the use of pesticides to give us more food. As long as no humans are harmed in the process to get to the end (that benefits us) then that is all right.

The problem I have with deontological ethics is that it seems impossible for us to all act in a rational way that we find ethical. Who is to say that eating meat is murder? Not everyone will agree with that even though those believers are dead set on their statement. Although, there are some fundamental beliefs all rational people believe in, such as the murder of an innocent human is wrong. It is a belief that most of us grew up with. Deontological ethics would have us believe that the murder is responsible for his actions and no one else is, regardless of the indirect actions we make in that situation. It takes the blame and puts it on the person committing the deadly acts.

I recycle. Therefore, Kantian ethics say that I am not responsible for the mixing of recyclable waste and (regular) waste. In the big picture, it feels good to know that I am making an impact on the preservation of this planet, no matter how small my actions are.

Being an agnostic, I have no religious beliefs that concern the earth or anything on it. However, coming from a purely nonreligious perspective, I do identify with some of the belief of religious environmental ethics. The natural environment is there for a reason as it was created (however that was.) I believe that it mustn't be altered too severely for our own purposes. Though I do have many anthropocentric beliefs, I do not agree with the assertion that humans were given nature and it's inhabitants to do with as we please. We all have the Earth, humans and animals and plants, and I am no more right to be here than they do. That being said, I will fight to save my life above the well being of nature.