I have been reading Peter Cave’s This Sentence is False, an excellent introduction to philosophical paradoxes written in an easily accessible style. A particularly interesting paradox he presents is the case of Mr. Badman and Mr. Goodman (Chapter 8, pp. 148-9). Mr. Badman is a bad man. Although married to an adoring wife and proclaiming … Continue reading The troubling case of Mr. Goodman & Mr. Badman
My daily newspaper, Die Presse, recently ran a special Sunday edition about morality and ethics. Throughout the paper they asked a wide range of people – from politicians to philosophers, from captains of industry to curators of art – the same three questions: What should humans no longer be allowed to do?What should humans never … Continue reading Is that allowed?
In 2010, the OECD issued a comprehensive report titled Fit Not Fat in which they noted that ‘before 1980, obesity rates were generally well below 10%. They have since doubled or tripled in many countries, and in almost half of the OECD, 50% or more of the population is overweight.’ The report outlined various approaches … Continue reading The societal and economic cost of obesity
One year ago Austria responded to the initial COVID-19 wave with tight restrictions. Being outside of your home was only permitted for essential work, to buy food, or to help others. Gatherings of more than five people were forbidden. These restrictions limited, and continue to limit, individuals’ agency – a common definition of harm. As … Continue reading Obesity and public healthcare
In previous posts I have argued in favor of consumer constraint as a viable measure for reducing GHG emissions. Further I have noted that in a liberal democracy for such policies to gain acceptance that proper narrative framing is crucial. Some limits and controls we will accept. Others we will not. The context of how … Continue reading Limitations of the harm principle
Two posts ago I examined how stopping profligate bread waste could reduce C02 emissions. Earlier in a comment to my post on climate change responsibility, Jordan had astutely noted that while consumers bear some responsibility in reducing emissions major corporations should also be held accountable. Today I will explore how assigning responsibility to both consumers … Continue reading Responsibility reloaded
Recently I wrote about intuitionism – things that we simply “know” to be right non-inferentially – and its limitations. How does one discern between a principle actually being right and it merely seeming right to a particular person? If intuitionism functioned correctly then all individuals would reach the same moral conclusions, yet people reach different … Continue reading What we believe to know
Following up on my last post, today I want to examine the importance of narratives in getting people – especially Europeans since I’m Austrian – involved in climate change activism. First, it is important to note that current inaction is not because people reject climate science. Europeans overwhelmingly agree that “the climate is probably or … Continue reading Climate change and FMGCs
In my last post I posed the question: Who specifically is responsible for addressing climate change and reducing GHG emissions? Today I provide one possible answer. I believe that considerable, if not the brunt of, responsibility ought to lie with consumers. However, it is unlikely that individuals accustomed to unlimited choice among a glut of … Continue reading Climate Change Responsibility
When I started studying political, economic, and legal philosophy at the University of Graz just for fun, little did I know that climate change would play a prominent role in the curriculum. Now in my fourth semester, I have had the opportunity to examine the urgings and arguments of diverse researchers – philosophers, economists, climate … Continue reading Who is responsible?