Should We Conserve Our Responsibility?

There are defensible reasons as to why humans have an ethical obligation under justice to things other than themselves. We have the choice to be responsible for aspects other than ourselves such as the wellbeing of future generations or nature. By being responsible for something other than ourselves, it will still benefit us because we would be protecting something that and it will help it by ensuring its survival. It is our responsibility to protect things other than ourselves. We should not preserve it, but conserve it. Preservation is not the answer because it would not allow for growth, mostly for humans, but also because people are not willing to change that much and we want to be able to use natural resources for our survival which cannot be done through preservation. Conservation is using but also replacing what has been used so there is not a decline in that species for example.
Rawls believes in a social contract theory with …show more content…
In essence, people are living life by taking as much as they want from natural resources by using the resources to make material to build buildings and then placing those buildings comprised of nature where nature once stood and never can stand again. The materials and landscape that will be available in the future is different, if not less than what is available to people today. As can be seen, “future people’s existence, number, and specific identity depend upon currently living people’s decisions and actions” (Hendlin). Technology advancements relate to the lives of people in the future because technology can be used to make new materials for buildings so natural resources are used less in the construction process. Sadly, technology can solve so many problems, even though buildings would be made using alternative materials, buildings would still have to be placed down where nature had once