Can Anyone Be Morally Impartial in Making Decisions Regarding the Environmental Crisis?

Abstract

This paper seeks to question two criteria traditionally present in the theory of justice and decision-making in the environmental crisis: 1) The possibility of moral impartiality and 2) The human/nature dichotomy. It is argued that the principle of moral partiality and interdependence with the environment will allow for a situated development of nature-friendly policies. It is argued that climate change allows us to reconsider our relationship with nature and that the ethics of environmental care, known as ecosophy, appeals to an encounter with nature rather than a distance. Finally, it is argued that it is not possible to be impartial in making decisions that affect nature, since nature actively participates in decisions about it. The relevance of this paper lies in the reflection and reformulation of contemporary ethical concerns to promote a caring relationship with nature.