Frederick Ferré

Moderation, morals, and meat

Meat‐eating as a human practice has been under ethical attack from philosophers such as Peter Singer and Tom Regan on both utilitarian and deontological grounds. An organicist ethic, on the other hand, recognizes that all life other than the primary producers, the plants, must feed on life. This essay affirms, with many environmental ethicists, the moralconsiderability of biota other than the human, but denies that this enlargement of the moral community beyond Homo sapiens necessarily precludes our eating of meat. First, absolute deontological arguments against meat‐eating are disputed, then utilitarian‐hedonistic arguments are shown not to be sufficient to require ethical vegetarianism. Both sorts of arguments have strengths, however, that set us on guard against current abuses in the meat‐raising and slaughtering industries. If the principle of ‘due respect’ for beings with different degrees of intrinsic value is honored, then moderate meat‐eating under reformed social practices can be seen as licit. T...

Personalistic organicism: paradox or paradigm?

Many environmental thinkers are torn in two opposing directions at once. For good reasons we are appalled by the damage that has been done to the earth by the ethos of heedless anthropocentric individualism, which has achieved its colossal feats of exploitation, encouraged to selfishness by its world view—of relation-free atoms—while chanting ‘reduction’ as its mantra. But also for good reasons we are repelled, at the other extreme, by environmentally correct images of mindless biocentric collectivisms in which precious personal values are overridden for the good of some healthy beehive ‘whole’.

In praise of anthropomorphism

Who could imagine, replied Demea, that Cleanthes, the calm, philosophical Cleanthes, would attempt to refute his antagonists by affixing a nickname to them, and, like the common bigots and inquisitors of the age, have recourse to invective and declamation instead of reasoning? Or does he not perceive that these topics are easily retorted, and that anthropomorphite is an appellation as invidious, and implies as dangerous consequences, as the epiphet of mystic with which he has honoured us?

Highlights and Connections

Given this chance to express my general reflections on our collection of papers, I shall highlight the themes that are of greatest importance to me and make connections between my own views and the views of the other authors (about half the total) who have chosen to address the same themes. This exercise in triangulation on the logical map created by the collection has been illuminating for me; I hope the following may serve to make some of the major features of our common terrain come into focus more clearly, thus underscoring which important issues concern many of us at present, despite our specific differences.

Religious World Modeling and Postmodern Science

Modern science has dealt notorious blows to person-oriented western religions. In a series of retreats, theologians have been forced to concede specific issues like the peripheral location of the earth in the universe, the kinship of Homo sapiens with the ancestral ooze, the depths of human unreason, and even the molecular basis for valued traits. But by far the most anguishing effect of modern science on the religious confidence of the civilization built by its technologies and shaped by its values lies deeper. It is the sense of alienation from responsible agency, from community with nature, and from personal inwardness. The images of the universe that are naturally drawn from the ideals of modern science ideals contributory to three centuries of intellectual and technological achievements -provide no home for such qualities.

The Use and Abuse of Theological Arguments

HE purpose of this paper is to help clarify the logical status, and therefore the appropriate role, of various sorts of arguments employed by theologians. I cannot here attempt to provide an exhaustive analysis, but even a silhouette of this subject matter -if accurate-may be of practical value to any who may be engaged in theological disputations. It is always important that the right tool be used for the right job; I should be disgusted to find that I had been wasting my time with a drill press on a project requiring a lathe; exploring the nature of ones tools, their potentialities and their limits, usually turns out to be no waste of time.

Value Judgments, God, and Ecological Ecumenism

The general worldview of this chapter is organic2 in metaphysics, prehensive3 in epistemology, and kalogenic4 in ethics. This means that I have a great deal in common with process philosophers and theologians, specifically with my friend, David Ray Griffin, whose chapter also appears in this book.

Personalistic Organicism and the Human Social Animal

I have been asked specifically to address the “Technicalization of Humans” as well as to reflect on the cultural impact and ethical problems surrounding human nature. I welcome this additional assignment, since it is important to notice that both nature and human nature are capable of being “technicalized” that is, that both are open to molding by intelligent purpose disciplined by method (Ferre 1988/1995). Reality in general is plastic before purpose. Philosophers of technology too often take this plasticity for granted and move on without reflecting on what it may mean for a comprehensive theory of reality at large. Even more striking, from the viewpoint of cultural impact and ethical problems, human reality is plastic before purpose. Cognitive, genetic, and social manipulations are possible, and are actually being practiced. How shall we understand this? What should we do about it?

Science, Technology, and Our Bill of Rights

My theme rises in connection with the current national recognition of the 200th anniversary of the Bill of Rights. Science and technology are, of course, immensely significant as political realities. When our American Constitution was fashioned, however, neither big science nor high technology was on the scene. This paper will reflect on the implicit significance of the original political instincts of the Framers for our techno-scientific present and future)

Clarifying and Applying Intelligence: A Reply to Peter Limper

Peter Limper raises three important questions, all centered around the character of intelligence and its roles in theoretical and practical pursuits. He also poses some significant challenges for future philosophical work that needs to be done. I am grateful for his perceptive reading and acknowledge that when he read “between the lines,” as he said, he invariably got it right.