The paper highlights ethical crises in wildlife conservation, suggesting a shift from anthropocentric views to an ecocentric perspective.
This paper explores the evolving relationship between humans and wildlife, highlighting the detrimental impacts of human expansion, industrialization, and habitat destruction on biodiversity. As human activities continue to destabilize ecosystems and drive species toward extinction, an ethical crisis has emerged regarding the treatment and preservation of wildlife. While current conservation efforts are critical, this paper argues that they are insufficient without a corresponding ethical shift in how humans perceive their role in relation to the natural world. Advocating for a move beyond the traditional anthropocentric view, the paper contends that wildlife, irrespective of their categorization as endangered, possesses intrinsic value across the board, deserving of moral consideration independent of their utility to humans. It proposes a wildlife ethic that balances human needs with the rights and well-being of other species by emphasizing on the necessity of adopting an outlook that promotes coexistence and aims at preserving biodiversity, i.e. an eco-centric attitude. This ethical framework is essential for addressing current environmental crises and developing a more sustainable, respectful relationship between humans and wildlife.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Deepalee Rout (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: