ABSTRACT
Most arguments for the preservation of biodiversity are consequentialist arguments – specifically cost/benefit analyses – seeking to demonstrate that the benefits of preserving biodiversity outweigh the cost of doing so, or alternatively that the cost of forgoing preservation of biodiversity outweighs any benefit derived from its destruction. An alternate ground – specifically an argument from antecedent moral precepts – for preserving biodiversity, however, can be derived from what may be thought of as ‘religious naturalism’.
