【導(dǎo)讀】集車站內(nèi)的大鐘走到這個時間，在921大地震中許多大樓應(yīng)聲倒下，而未倒的危樓更超出百棟以上。公共建築損毀比率較民間建築高，相關(guān)知能，請查照。為何討論環(huán)境的道德觀？而道德感又是人類價值觀的一重要部份，故道德感之強(qiáng)與弱將會影響到人類之未來。故本人將針對萬物之未來，進(jìn)行探討道德心。中藥---如虎骨、犀牛角等。吃稀有動物---如熊膽(bear. 用象牙、珊瑚等物品

　　

【正文】 mer expresses his want, or preference, for a product in terms of willingness to pay (WTP) based on the benefits each (person) expects to derive from consumption. – WTP is a measure of the marginal benefit. – Preferences are wants that the individual has rankordered. 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 48 Allocative efficiency ? The economic criterion that the value society places on an additional unit of the good be equivalent to the value of the resources given up to produce it. Or, a petitive market reaches a state where marginal benefit = marginal cost. 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 49 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 50 Sagoff’s three challenges against economic methods 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 51 First, want ? belief (1) ? Want is neither true nor false, ., I want chocolate ice cream. – WTP is a good measure of the intensity of a person’s want. Hence costbenefit analysis is valid. Efficient resources allocation can be discovered. ? Belief can be true or false and is subject to rational evaluation, ., I believe killing tiger is wrong. – WTP is a bad measure when immoral want is expressed in terms of WTP. 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 52 First, want ? belief (2) – When economic methods, ., costbenefit analysis, are involved in environmental policy, it treats beliefs as if they were mere wants and seriously distorts the issue. ? Example: Timber industry’s WTP for trees is higher than the recreational users’. Does this mean the rational decision is to cut the tree down? 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 53 Second, allocative efficiency criterion might not be ethical (1) ? Utilitarion’s logic: maximizes good ? Economist identifies that peoples’ wants must be good. So we should maximize consumers’ wants or their preferences, according to utilitarion’s logic, based on the allocative efficiency criterion. And this is ethical. 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 54 Second, allocative efficiency criterion might not be ethical (2) ? Fact: personal preferences may be foolish, dangerous, or immoral due to lack of rational evaluations that can be defended by reasons(理由 ). – Example: Excessive resources consumption of our society, a good want that needs to be satisfied according to economic theory, will definitely endanger the welfare of future generations. 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 55 Second, allocative efficiency criterion might not be ethical (3) ? The challenge: Economic methodology indiscriminately take preference as good and maximizes this good according to allocative efficiency criterion will probably result in an uhical act. 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 56 Third, market analysis threatens our democratic process (1) ? A healthy liberaldemocratic political process should be, – liberal in the sense that we value personal liberty to pursue our individual goals – democratic in the sense that collectively we seek agreement about public goods and shared goals – treating people as both consumer and citizen – citizens exchange views, debate their merits, learn from each other, and reach agreement 11/17/2020 Environmental Ethics 57 Third, market analysis threatens our democratic process (2) ? An unhealthy liberaldemocratic political process begins when, – politicians may follow the results of economic analysis and satisfy the demands of the majority without citizens’ exchange of views …. They usually read the public opinion polls and act accordingly. Politician should act as an active leader rather than passive follower.