“贡献伦理”的案例:或如何思考全球问题时代的个人道德

IF 1.5 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Ethics Policy & Environment Pub Date : 2020-09-01 DOI:10.1080/21550085.2020.1848188
Travis N. Rieder, J. Bernstein
{"title":"“贡献伦理”的案例:或如何思考全球问题时代的个人道德","authors":"Travis N. Rieder, J. Bernstein","doi":"10.1080/21550085.2020.1848188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Many of us believe that we can and do have individual obligations to refrain from contributing to massive collective harms – say, from producing luxury greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; however, our individual actions are so small as to be practically meaningless. Can we then, justify the intuition that we ought to refrain? In this paper, we argue that this debate may have been mis-framed. Rather than investigating whether or not we have obligations to refrain from contributing to collective action, perhaps we should ask whether we have reason to do so. However, this framing brings challenges of its own, and so we close by asking what problems are generated if we focus on these questions of ‘contributory ethics’.","PeriodicalId":45955,"journal":{"name":"Ethics Policy & Environment","volume":"226 1","pages":"299 - 319"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Case for ‘Contributory Ethics’: Or How to Think about Individual Morality in a Time of Global Problems\",\"authors\":\"Travis N. Rieder, J. Bernstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21550085.2020.1848188\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Many of us believe that we can and do have individual obligations to refrain from contributing to massive collective harms – say, from producing luxury greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; however, our individual actions are so small as to be practically meaningless. Can we then, justify the intuition that we ought to refrain? In this paper, we argue that this debate may have been mis-framed. Rather than investigating whether or not we have obligations to refrain from contributing to collective action, perhaps we should ask whether we have reason to do so. However, this framing brings challenges of its own, and so we close by asking what problems are generated if we focus on these questions of ‘contributory ethics’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics Policy & Environment\",\"volume\":\"226 1\",\"pages\":\"299 - 319\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics Policy & Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2020.1848188\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics Policy & Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2020.1848188","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

我们中的许多人认为,我们可以而且确实有个人义务避免造成大规模的集体危害——例如,避免产生奢侈的温室气体(GHG)排放;然而,我们个人的行为是如此之小,以至于实际上毫无意义。那么,我们能证明我们应该克制的直觉吗?在本文中,我们认为这种争论可能是错误的。与其调查我们是否有义务不参与集体行动,不如问问我们是否有理由这样做。然而,这种框架本身也带来了挑战,所以我们要问,如果我们关注这些“贡献伦理”问题,会产生什么问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Case for ‘Contributory Ethics’: Or How to Think about Individual Morality in a Time of Global Problems
ABSTRACT Many of us believe that we can and do have individual obligations to refrain from contributing to massive collective harms – say, from producing luxury greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; however, our individual actions are so small as to be practically meaningless. Can we then, justify the intuition that we ought to refrain? In this paper, we argue that this debate may have been mis-framed. Rather than investigating whether or not we have obligations to refrain from contributing to collective action, perhaps we should ask whether we have reason to do so. However, this framing brings challenges of its own, and so we close by asking what problems are generated if we focus on these questions of ‘contributory ethics’.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics Policy & Environment
Ethics Policy & Environment ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Revising the Keystone Species Concept for Conservation: Value Neutrality and Non-Nativeness Why Conceptions of Scale Matter to Artificity Arguments in SRM Ethics Animal Dignity: Philosophical Reflections on Non-Human Existence Justice and Sustainability Tensions in Agriculture: Wicked Problems in the Case of Dutch Manure Policy Covert Moral Enhancement: Are Dirty Hands Needed to Save the Planet?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1