Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Armstrong - individual moral obligations in global warming - Coggle Diagram
Armstrong - individual moral obligations in global warming
Uses many moral principles
Kantian, virtue ethics, social contract traditions, consequentialist, natural law (double effect)
Argues applying principles doesn't imply that he has a moral obligation to not take a Sunday drive
Instead gov has moral obligation to address problem because only they are in a position to help fix it
Even if scientists prove global warming, economists confirm cost would be less, political theorists agree governments must do something about it
Moral obligations on individuals about global warming still not clear
Assumptions
Global warming has begun and is likely to increase
Big amount of GW is due to human activities biggest cause: fossil fuels
GW will create long-term problems by causing climate changes: storms, floods from rising sea level, drops, heat waves, many deaths
Poor - most hurt, closer to sea level. Which countries causing most of global warming, but will adopt two changes easily.
1 more item...
The problem
It's clear that INDIVIDUAL moral obligations don't always follow from COLLECTIVE moral obligations
Just bcuz gov ought to do something doesn't prove you should do it even if gov fails
Ex. If a bridge is dangerous, gov has moral obligation to make it safe. I don't have an obligation to fix it, it's the govs job not mine. I ought to encourage the govs fulfill its obligations
Sometimes obligations are parallel to individual
1 more item...
My individual obligations: protest against bad gov policies, vote candidates who will make gov help GW, support private organizations against GW (Pew Foundation), boycott companies that contribute to GW (oil companies)
Focus on one act: driving for pleasure: not for work, groceries or cuz ur sad
2 more items...
Actual act principles
We have a moral obligation to not performing act that causes harm to others
If person had an inhale exhaust from my car (get sick) this would harm him and this gives me more obligation to not drive car for fun
1 more item...
But there are acts that cause harm without being necessary sufficient for that harm
1 more item...
Indirect harm principle
We have a moral obligation to not perform an act that causes indirect harm two others by causing someone else to carry out those indirect Acts
1 more item...
Anyways this principle is misleading
2 more items...