This paper will evaluate a range of humanist and posthumanist ethical positions as useful bases for environmental education. It will conclude that a range of such positions can be seen as embracing respect for non-human nature. Therefore, environmental education can effectively embrace ethical pluralism to some extent. Embracing a degree of pluralism potentially makes it easier for teachers and students with a wide range of preconceptions to become more pro-environmental, while highly committed and exclusive approaches can prove divisive. However, some humanist and posthumanist positions are grounded in dismissive or reductive attitudes to non-human nature. In summary, there is no one suitable ethical basis for environmental education in the humanist and non-humanist traditions, but several. However, the key to the effectiveness of any of these is full acceptance that human and non-human flourishing are integrally related, and that non-human nature must therefore be both respected (that is, both admired and cared for), and not merely when this meets short-term instrumental human goals.