Between Pragmatic Relativism and Deep Ecology: A Philosophical Inquiry into Ecological Decision-Making in Rural Philippines

Abstract

Environmental ethics literature has long debated which philosophical framework, anthropocentrism, ecocentrism, or biocentrism, best guides human ecological behavior. In developing-country contexts, particularly in rural Southeast Asia, ecological decision-making is inextricably bound with survival imperatives, rendering single-framework environmental ethics insufficient for both moral analysis and practical guidance. This study addresses that gap by examining the philosophical reasoning of trained philosophers when confronted with the lived reality of poverty-driven deforestation in the Philippines. Drawing on qualitative data gathered through focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with nine philosophy professors, this paper established the three interconnected findings: first, survival-driven ecological decisions carry philosophical legitimacy that single-framework ethics cannot accommodate. Second, anthropocentrism, ecocentrism, and biocentrism each fail independently to address the moral complexity of poverty-embedded ecological choices. Third, the convergence of these frameworks toward a responsible, bounded use of natural resources represents a sophisticated philosophical response grounded in contextual relativism.  These findings contribute to the emerging discourse on postcolonial environmental ethics and propose Contextual Ecological Ethics (CEE) as a framework for ecological decision-making in the Global South. The paper calls for interdisciplinary, community-embedded approaches to environmental ethics education that honor both ecological integrity and human dignity.