Mellon, Joseph2024-12-122024-12-121989-06https://hdl.handle.net/1794/30249288 pagesThis work presents a case against the need for moral theory in nature ethics. A theory is not needed to bridge a gap between f acts and values. One is not needed to handle crisis cases. Nor is one needed to extend the moral circle of car e beyond human beings. Ordinary moral reasoning will suffice . To show this , moral cases are made for a vegan diet , and against the use of animals in research. The moral theorist is then left with this dilemma: either the details of a moral issue are enough to settle it , thus rendering a moral theory unnecessary , or the details are not enough, but neither is any moral theory. In place of theory, a moral vision is sketched , one which is at once contemplative , feminist . anarchist , pacifist, anti-capital ist , and pro- nature.en-USCreative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0-USUO theses and dissertations are provided for research and educational purposes and may be under copyright by the author or the author’s heirs. Please contact us <mailto:scholars@uoregon.edu> with any questions or comments. In your email, please be sure to include the URL and title of the specific items of your inquiry.philosophy, moral theory, nature ethics, ethics, animal research, moral diet, moral vision, valueThesis / Dissertation