The accusation
"People who want to help wild animals are making value judgments about something that belongs to ecology, not ethics."
Two different jobs
- Describing what happens in ecosystems is the job of ecology and other sciences.
- Deciding what we should do about it is a question for ethics.
One doesn't replace the other. Science tells us how many baby animals starve; ethics asks whether we should do something about it.
Everyone makes value judgments
It's not only the people in favor of helping who make value judgments. Saying "we shouldn't help animals living in the wild" is also a moral judgment.
Judgments in disguise
The author warns that sometimes a moral judgment is disguised as a description so it looks neutral and scientific, and gets accepted more easily. For example, saying "nature is in balance" as if that proved everything is fine.
Who knows science?
Since many scientists in the field hold environmentalist values, it can seem like people who care about the good of each animal don't know science. That's not true: scientific knowledge can be used for different goals, including helping animals.
In short
- Describing is the job of science; deciding what to do is the job of ethics.
- Saying "we shouldn't help" is also a value judgment.
- Moral judgments are sometimes disguised as scientific descriptions.