Environmental Ethics

Front 1

Economic Anthropocentrism

Back 1

Using Market needs to meet human needs with regard to the environment.

Front 2

Psychological Egoism

Back 2

the view that everyone always behaves selfishly all the time.

Front 3

Free Rider

Back 3

a person who benefits from public goods but does not contribute to their production or maintenance.

Front 4

Public Goods

Back 4

goods whose benefits cannot be limited to a single owner.

Front 5

a Malthusian view

Back 5

the view that human populations, like those of other species, tend to grow too large , resulting in scarcity and widespread starvation.

Front 6

a Cornucopian View

Back 6

the view that there are no inherent limits to the human use of natural resources.

Front 7

Free Markets

Back 7

Rule governed institutions for the exchange of goods and services, in which consumer demand significantly influences the nature, quantity and price of what is produced.

Front 8

Human Rights

Back 8

the view of all humans as having basic rights. A possible basis for demanding conduct from people that is not motivated by market incentives.

Front 9

Anthropocentric

Back 9

Centered on Human Beings

Front 10

ethics

Back 10

a reasoned account of how people should live their lives

Front 11

nonanthropocentric

Back 11

not centered on human beings

Front 12

argument

Back 12

a sequence of propositions

Front 13

propositions

Back 13

sentences that have truth values

Front 14

inference

Back 14

logical derivation

Front 15

conclusion

Back 15

the proposition that the person giving the argument is trying to prove. The premises are provided in order to establish the conclusion

Front 16

convergent arguments

Back 16

arguments in which the same conclusion is argued for by a number of independent sets of premises

Front 17

divergent arguments

Back 17

arguments in which the same premise or assumption is used to argue for a number of different conclusions

Front 18

serial arguments

Back 18

arguments in which each premise depends on a previous premise

Front 19

non-economic anthropocentrism

Back 19

deals with things that cannot be captured in economic calculations, such as aeshetics, family, and national heritage

Front 20

valid arguments

Back 20

there is no way for the conclusion to be falseif all the premises are true. An argument is valid if it is structured in a way that, even if the premises are false, the conclusion follows logically from the premises

Front 21

invalid argument

Back 21

the truth of the premises does not entail the conclusion-the conclusion can be false even if the premises are true

Front 22

sound argument

Back 22

valid, containing only true premises

Front 23

unsound argument

Back 23

invalid with all true premises; valid with at least one false premise; invalid with at least one false premise

Front 24

a cogent argument

Back 24

the argument is sound, and the premises and conclusion are presented in such a way that the reader can easily perceive the argument's soundness

Front 25

cost-benefit analysis

Back 25

requires that all costs and benefits associated with a proposal be identified, and that dollar amounts be assigned to each

Front 26

shadow pricing

Back 26

a benefit that can be bought with dollars is used to suggest appropriate dollar equivalents for benefits that cannot be bought