The moral and the ethical aspects of environmental destruction need to be addressed for the sake of “nature”/nonhuman spaces/communities/life themselves.

The form of thinking that “nature” and nonhuman spaces exist for societal gains – in either direction constructive or destructive – poses a problem.

Our dependence on “nature” doesn’t legitimate our fundamentally hegemonial-anthropocenic attitudes towards “nature”.

The notion that nature and nonhuman spaces ought to serve human interests implies that we assume

a.) nature as a “resource”

and that b.) nature was void of autonomous meaning and ecosocial completeness.

Both notions are presumably the core ones that lead to destructive behaviour towards “nature”/nonhuman spaces.

Harming and polluting “nature” and nonhuman spaces are actions of anthropogenic ethical disregard for “nature” itself.

florae obscurae by Farangis G. Yegane

Antibiologistic Animal Sociology

( > repost from our Visual Opinions Workshop @ tierechtsethik.de > https://tierrechtsethik.de/ecocide-is-foremostly-and-ethical-issue/ )