Nalazite se na CroRIS probnoj okolini. Ovdje evidentirani podaci neće biti pohranjeni u Informacijskom sustavu znanosti RH. Ako je ovo greška, CroRIS produkcijskoj okolini moguće je pristupi putem poveznice www.croris.hr
izvor podataka: crosbi !

Climate Change and Harm to Collectives (CROSBI ID 665651)

Prilog sa skupa u zborniku | sažetak izlaganja sa skupa

Jolić, Tvrtko Climate Change and Harm to Collectives // ENFA 7 – Seventh National Meeting in Analytic Philosophy. 2018. str. 51-52

Podaci o odgovornosti

Jolić, Tvrtko

engleski

Climate Change and Harm to Collectives

With the rising concern that the climate change is going to turn the life prospects of the future generations for the worse, philosophers try to answer who exactly are we harming by our environmentally reckless behaviour. It is obvious that the most dramatic consequences of the climate change will be felt by the generations that will not come into existence during our lifetime. As Parfit noted, our choice between different policies affect who will later be born (Parfit 1987). We can for instance choose a risky public policy that leads to 3C temperature rise 200 years from now: that will create harsh life conditions for the future humans, but on the other hand, these people would never have been born had we chosen some other policy. This is the famous non- identity problem. This reasoning led some to the conclusion that these future people are not harmed by our reckless behaviour that created harsh life conditions as long as they are provided with basic requirements for leading minimally decent life. Many find this conclusion counterintuitive: they believe that some act can be wrong even though they don’t harm future persons they cause to both exist and suffer. But who is then wronged/harmed? One way to deal with this problem, suggested by Page (2006), is to claim that the harm is done not to the individuals but to the collectives. Even though no particular individual will exist in the future where risky policy is adopted who would have existed had it not been, various collectives will. In my presentation I take up on this suggestion, and I will try to provide explanation how collectives can be harmed. The problem I want to address is how can a collective be harmed by an action when no single member of that collective is harmed by it (in above mentioned sense). The idea of collective rights, where collective rights are understood to be simply aggregation of the rights of its members, cannot answer the question. This is because the change of membership in the generations causes changes in the aggregated collective rights. The non- identity problem kicks in again! Instead I suggest we should adopt a more robust idea of collectives, the one based on the idea of group agency. As noted by List and Pettit, group agents “are distinguished by the fact that they can enter a system of obligations recognized in common with others, and limit their influence on one another to that permitted within the terms of that system” (List and Pettit 2011: 178). States are prime example of the collectives that are also the group agents, and I will claim that they can be harmed by our environmentally reckless behaviour. I take it that states have a duty to secure basic human rights of their own citizens and of non- citizens. Hence, states have corresponding right not to be subverted in performing this duty. Other people (and other states) violate this collective right by adopting environmentally reckless behaviour that leads to the condition where state cannot perform its basic function.

harm ; group agency ; climate change ; group rights

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

Podaci o prilogu

51-52.

2018.

objavljeno

Podaci o matičnoj publikaciji

ENFA 7 – Seventh National Meeting in Analytic Philosophy

Podaci o skupu

ENFA 7 – Seventh National Meeting in Analytic Philosophy

predavanje

13.09.2018-15.09.2018

Lisabon, Portugal

Povezanost rada

Filozofija