PhilArchive
open access
‘Relational Values’ is Neither a Necessary nor Justified Ethical Concept
‘Relational value’ (RV) has intuitive credibility due to the shortcomings of existing axiological categories regarding recognizing the ethical relevance of people’s relations to nature. But RV is justified by arguments and analogies that do not hold up to closer scrutiny, which strengthens the assumption that RV is redundant. While RV may provide reasons for ethically considering some relations, much work remains to show that RV is a concept that does something existing axiological concepts cannot, beyond empirically describing relations people have to environmental areas and places.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Plural valuation of nature for equity and sustainability: Insights from the Global South#1110947
- Literature and Ethical Values#67204
- Nature's Relations: Ontology, Vulnerability, Agency#778893
- Indigenous Religious Knowledge and Environmental Ethics Stewardship: A Case of the Wakara in Ukara Island#695313
- Objective Value Is Not a Necessary Condition in Susan Wolf’s Meaning in Life and Why It Matters#690187
Record · ID 94496
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive