PHL 363 at Southern New Hampshire University analyses the application of ethical theory to moral questions about the environment. The catalog says several traditions in environmental ethics are discussed, with their strengths and weaknesses evaluated by applying them to practical moral problems.
The central skill is comparison: take a real environmental problem and show what each tradition says about it, where they agree and where they conflict.
Course at a Glance
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| University | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Course code | PHL 363 |
| Credits | 3 |
| Level | Upper-level undergraduate (300 series) |
| Subject | Environmental ethics |
| Prerequisites | None listed in the SNHU catalog |
| Typical work | Case analyses, theory comparisons, discussions (check your course for the exact list) |
Traditions and Questions
Your readings define the exact traditions. Environmental ethics courses typically contrast views by what they treat as having moral standing.
| View (typical) | What has moral standing |
|---|---|
| Human-centered (anthropocentric) | Humans only; nature matters through its effects on people |
| Animal-centered | Beings that can suffer |
| Life-centered | All living things |
| Ecosystem-centered (holistic) | Species, ecosystems and the whole biotic community |
Applying a Tradition to a Problem
Choose a specific problem, state the question narrowly, and let each tradition answer it.
Invented scenario: A town wants to drain a wetland for housing. A human-centered view weighs housing and flood protection against recreation and water quality for people. An animal-centered view asks about the suffering or loss of the animals that live there. A holistic view asks what the loss does to the ecosystem as a whole.
Your analysis then notes where the answers diverge and which tradition handles the case best, with a reason.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The catalog asks you to evaluate traditions, so every analysis needs a limit. A common weakness of holistic views is that they seem to permit sacrificing individuals for the whole, while human-centered views can undervalue nature that has no obvious use to us.
Typical Assignments and How to Approach Them
| Assignment type | What it tests | How to approach it |
|---|---|---|
| Theory comparison | Understanding of traditions | Compare on a shared question, not in separate summaries |
| Case analysis | Application to a real problem | Define the problem, apply two or more traditions, evaluate |
| Discussion post | Reasoning and response | Take a position, support it, answer one objection |
| Position essay | Defended thesis | Thesis, argument, objection, reply, conclusion |
A Comparison Grid for Any Case
Fill a grid like this before drafting. It shows quickly where traditions agree, which makes your evaluation sharper.
| Tradition | Verdict on your case | Reason | Main weakness |
|---|---|---|---|
| Human-centered | (your analysis) | Effects on people | Undervalues nature without use |
| Animal-centered | (your analysis) | Suffering of animals | Struggles with plants and ecosystems |
| Holistic | (your analysis) | Health of the whole system | May override individuals |
Where Students Get Stuck
- Mixing science and ethics. Facts about ecosystems support a moral claim only through a principle. State the principle.
- Staying descriptive. Say which view is more convincing and why.
- Broad topics. "Climate change" is too wide; pick one decision.
- Appeals to emotion. Strong feeling is not an argument; give reasons.
Study Tips for PHL 363
- Keep a one-line definition of each tradition and its main criticism.
- Pick two running cases and apply every new tradition to them.
- Be consistent about what counts as having moral standing.
- Check scientific claims against reliable sources before building on them.
Questions That Run Through the Course
Beyond naming traditions, the course asks you to test them. These questions come up again and again, and a clear answer to each makes a good thesis.
- Moral standing. Which beings or systems count morally, and why those and not others?
- Value. Is nature valuable only for what it does for us, or valuable in itself?
- Obligations to the future. What do we owe people who do not yet exist?
- Conflicts. When human interests clash with the interests of species or ecosystems, what settles it?
Choosing a Practical Case
The catalog asks you to apply traditions to practical moral problems. A good case has a clear decision, identifiable stakeholders and public facts you can cite.
| Case type | Decision to analyze |
|---|---|
| Land use | Develop, restore or protect a particular area |
| Species protection | Whether to spend limited funds on one threatened species |
| Resource use | How much a community may extract from a shared resource |
| Disaster response | Who bears responsibility after an environmental incident |
Structuring a PHL 363 Case Analysis
A clear outline keeps a comparison from turning into three separate summaries. Use a shape like this, adjusted to your word limit.
- The decision. State the choice facing a named decision-maker, in one or two sentences.
- The facts. Give only the facts that matter to the moral question, with sources.
- Two or more traditions. For each, state its verdict and the principle behind it.
- Comparison. Say where the verdicts agree, where they conflict, and why.
- Your evaluation. Argue which tradition handles this case best, and name its limits.
The final step is the one the catalog stresses: evaluating strengths and weaknesses. A paper that ends with a description has not yet done it.
How We Help with PHL 363
Send the prompt, rubric and assigned readings. We clarify traditions, review your comparison and structure, and prepare custom analyses for study.
GradeEssays is independent of Southern New Hampshire University. We offer tutoring, custom answers, editing and feedback; follow your university's integrity rules in what you submit. We do not use course portals or complete assessments, and we cannot promise grades.
Apply Environmental Ethics to Your Case
Share your prompt and readings. We prepare a custom analysis or review your draft.
Start My PHL 363 PaperFree revisions · Full refund if late · Written from scratch for your order
Frequently Asked Questions
The application of ethical theory to moral questions about the environment, comparing traditions and evaluating them on practical problems.
No. You need accurate basic facts about your case, but the course is philosophical.
None are listed in the SNHU catalog.
Pick a specific decision with identifiable stakeholders, such as a land-use or conservation choice, rather than a global topic.
Test it on cases: say what it gets right, then give a case where its answer seems wrong or incomplete.
Yes. Send it with the rubric for feedback on argument, balance and structure.