1. Is it more important to be a good person or to perform good acts? (Virtue ethics vs. action ethics)

The concept of being a good person and performing good acts are very closely related but are not exactly dependent on one another. It is possible to be a good person without performing good acts and it is possible to perform good acts without being a good person. This matter of virtue vs action brings up the question: What does it mean to be a good person? I believe it is more important to perform good acts because without action, there is no change. People may have good intentions and positive thoughts but in order to make the world a better place, we must turn those thoughts into something tangible. Under most circumstances, actions speak louder than words. When determining whether or not the ends justify the means, a person’s virtue must come into question. If a result makes a large positive impact on the world but the means for obtaining this result had some negative effects, this would procedurally justifiable. For example, if a person finds a new method for growing more crops but in the process had to sacrifice a few farms, the ends justify the means. The total benefit of this person’s actions outweighs any potential negatives. Destroying a farm’s crops is not seen as virtuous, but the actions were with positive intentions for change.

4. Do ecosystems matter for their own sake, or do they only matter to the extent that they impact humans (ecocentric ethics vs. anthropocentric ethics)?

Ecosystems matter for their own sake far more than for how they impact humans. Humans have existed for a significantly small portion of our ecosystems entire existence. To have an anthropocentric attitude is to say that the ecosystem is here only for our benefit. Often humans will sacrifice the environment for their own welfare. When humans use natural resources and harm the environment with over consumption, they often think little as to how this affects the ecosystem in the long run. It is more important to have an ecosystem that will be around for generations to come than it is to have an ecosystem that supports the current society. Ecocentric ethics addresses the concept of distributive justice and how the consequences that we as humans create are distributed in the environment. Improving the lives of humans does not justify destroying our ecosystems. Just because tearing down a forest will provide shelter for people does not mean we are justified in doing so. Ecosystems matter because they will be here long after our present society is. Sustaining the environment and not making a negative impact is the way we can ensure that this will happen.

6. Is my own life worth more than the lives of others, the same, or less (selfishness vs. altruism)?

I do not believe my life is worth any more than the life of another person. While I value my own life very much, I do not think there is any person on this Earth that deserves to be alive more or less than I do. An altruistic person can be defined as someone who contributes to the world. I believe that is what makes a person’s life worthy: how much they can contribute and make a positive impact on our world. While I care more about my family and friends than I would a random person, I do not believe my friends and family’s lives are any more valuable. While this is something I strongly believe in, I cannot truthfully say that I would be willing to sacrifice more to a total stranger than I would to a family member. Under certain circumstances, being selfish can mean not only benefitting yourself but also benefitting the people you love and care about. Being altruistic is about balancing how you value yourself and others. You can value all human life by doing things to help our world, like living sustainably.