ABSTRACT
To me, the very idea of living in integrity does not refer to specific states of certain ecosystems, but to a human way of life with and within nature that is grounded in all the reasonable arguments by which the universe of discourse in environmental ethics is constituted. The ideal of moral persons who have comprised the universe of environmental discourse completely and profoundly entails a eudaimonistic (eudaimonia meaning related to a good and flourishing human life), a political and a moral dimension of personhood. In the eudaimonistic dimension, we find many culturally shaped biophilic values (aesthetic, recreational, transformative, heritage, bioregional and the like), which have impacts on the virtues and attitudes of such persons. Thus such persons are mostly ‘naturalists’ in lifestyle, adopting most of the virtues Philip Cafaro recommends in his writings on environmental virtue ethics. 1 The virtue of voluntary simplicity is at the core of such a lifestyle. In the political dimension, such persons will engage in environmental policies, such as nature conservation, restoration ecology or the mitigation of climate change. In this chapter, I remain silent on environmental policymaking, focusing on (meta-)ethical problems. 2
