Weak anthropocentric intrinsic value by hargrove eugene

While agreeing with the observation made by Hargrove, the subject of discussion that he appears to have failed in, is disputing the concept of subjectivist nonanthropocentric intrinsic value. The theory of subjective anthropocentric value theory, as presented by J. Baird Callicott observes that nature has no value of its own unless it is given to it by human beings since values depend entirely on human judgment (Hargrove, 194). While Hargrove tends to dispute this argument by arguing that nature has its intrinsic value, there is a reason to disagree with his argument, since without the judgment conferred upon nature by human beings to determine its value, there is no way that nature on its own can possess value. In disputing Hargrove’s argument against subjective anthropocentric value theory, I contend with J. Baird Callicott, that something becomes valuable only because somebody values it (Hargrove, 195). It is apparent that all value depends on the subjective feelings of human observers, and that value will hardly exist in nature unless it is given to it by human value judgment (Hargrove, 196).