Sample Ecology Essay Paper on The Anthropocentric and Biocentric Worldviews

The Anthropocentric and Biocentric Worldviews

Environmental ethics have become one of the major concerns among the environmental advocates and governmental agencies across the globe due to the intense destruction of the ecosystem. Understanding the ecological principles is believed to enhance conservation, sustainable consumption, and protection of the natural resource for the future generation. According to studies, the primary methods of environmental ethics include anthropocentrism, ecocentrism, and biocentrism (Surmeli & Saka, 2013). The anthropocentric technique involves the egoistic and socialturistic ideals held by individuals that believe the environmental repercussions are based on oneself. The anthropocentric approach is human-centered, implying that people are the superior creatures on the planet, hence, depends on the natural resources to fulfill their wants. The biocentric also known as the life-centered ecological morals states that all forms of life are essential thereby requires similar rights like that of humans (McShane, 2014). As such, people are bestowed with the responsibility of safeguarding the environment.

The Worldview I Identify with

The worldview I am most conversant with is the biocentric approach which advocates for equal rights to flora and fauna.  The technique states that all the living things are important, hence, requires to be protected to avoid extinction and the associated effects to humans. The approach has received significant support from most of the public, government, and non-governmental organizations that are concerned with the impact of climate change. According to the proponents of biocentric, individual’s feeling towards another human being is to be extended to the natural environment by averting possible environmental deteriorations (Attfield, 2012). Equally, biocentrism is derived from two dimensions: the desire to prevent inflicting harm to the sentient beings and the need to maintain purity in nature.   

The biocentric arguments stipulate that all the living things are dependent on each other for survival and well-being. Therefore, destroying the environment leads to a functional imbalance in the ecosystem which might cause severe consequences such as drought (Attfield, 2012). Equally, people share a common origin with the living organisms in which humans are seen as late arrivals in the evolution thus are required to protect and conserve nature. Additionally, all beings play a significant role in the ecosystem and destruction of one organism affects the ecological process. The biocentrism individualism is an example of the biocentric techniques which states that each living organism within the ecosystem has the moral value in the environmental course (Rottman, 2014). As such, it is vital for human beings to secure the natural resources to enhance sustainable growth and for future generation use. 


Public understanding of environmental ethics plays a significant role in enhancing sustainable consumption and protection of the ecosystem. The major ecological ethics include the biocentric, anthropological, and the ecocentrism approaches. The biocentrism technique states that it is the responsibility of human beings to offer security and protection of the environment. The ethic has received backing from the environmental activists, governments, and other agencies making it be the most conversant principle across the globe. For instance, the theory indicates that living things need to receive similar rights to that of humans to prevent the uncontrolled destruction of nature. Published documents indicate that all the organisms in the universe are dependent on each other. Therefore, damaging one of the creatures causes an environmental imbalance which might lead to consequences such as drought. As such, it is essential for humans to avoid the unregulated use of natural resources and conserve the ecosystem for future generations.  


Attfield, R. (2012). Biocentrism and artificial life. Environmental Values, 21(1), 83-94.

McShane, K. (2014). Individualist biocentrism vs. Holism revisited. In Les ateliers de l’éthique/The Ethics Forum (Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 130-148).

Rottman, J. (2014). Breaking down biocentrism: two distinct forms of moral concern for nature. Frontiers in psychology, 5, 905.

Surmeli, H., & Saka, M. (2013). Preservice Teachers ‘anthropocentric, Biocentric, and Ecocentric Environmental Ethics Approaches. Mathematics education, 29(9).