Is the goal of environmentalism to maximize the health of the environment, or to maximize the health of the environment experienced by the average person?

(I think both are valid goals, but they can lead to very different conclusions)

Is the goal of environmentalism to maximize the health of the environment, or to maximize the health of the environment experienced by the average person?

(I think both are valid goals, but they can lead to very different conclusions)

https://x.com/TheGattoniCelli/status/1796949964804747335

What's the difference?

If the health of the environment gets so bad that it's dangerous to 95% of people on the planet, then both goals have failed

The example I provided (urbanism) is a major difference!

If the entire world population lives in dense megacities, then 99.9%+ of the world's surface can remain untouched (except agriculture). But in that world, the average person's life experience would have a lot more glass and steel and concrete and fewer trees.

A specific balance is required for our ecosystem to remain healthy. Realizing the hypothetical would alterate that delicate stasis. 

It isn’t about any particular variable, but rather about their coexistence. 🤍