title: Environmental philosophy: response to critics.
abstract: The following piece is a response to the critiques from Frank, Garson, and Odenbaugh. The issues at stake are: the definition of biodiversity and its normativity, historical fidelity in ecological restoration, naturalism in environmental ethics, and the role of decision theory. The normativity of the concept of biodiversity in conservation biology is defended. Historical fidelity is criticized as an operative goal for ecological restoration. It is pointed out that the analysis requires only minimal assumptions about ethics. Decision theory is presented as a tool, not a domain-limiting necessary requirement for environmental philosophy.
authors.affiliation: Department of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Department of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA. Electronic address: sarkar@austin.utexas.edu.
authors.forename: Sahotra
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Sarkar
mesh_terms: D044822:Biodiversity; D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources / Q000379:methods*; D003657:Decision Making; D004463:Ecology / Q000941:ethics*; D017753:Ecosystem; D006040:Goals; D006801:Humans; D010684:Philosophy; D012945:Social Values
keywords: Biodiversity; Conservation biology; Decision theory; Ecological restoration; Historical fidelity; Naturalism