何时允许强加和抵消风险？对 Barry 和 Cullity 的回应

IF 4.6 1区哲学 Q1 ETHICS

Ethics Pub Date : 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1086/729709

Brian Berkey

{"title":"何时允许强加和抵消风险？对 Barry 和 Cullity 的回应","authors":"Brian Berkey","doi":"10.1086/729709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Christian Barry and Garrett Cullity argue that there is a morally important distinction between offsetting by “sequestering” and offsetting by “forestalling.” They further claim that offsetting by sequestering will often make risk-imposing actions permissible, while offsetting by forestalling typically will not. In this article, I highlight some reasons to be skeptical about their view and suggest an alternative account of the conditions in which offsetting can make a risk-imposing action permissible. In addition, I note a significant implication of my argument for the ethics of greenhouse gas offsetting.","PeriodicalId":48118,"journal":{"name":"Ethics","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When Is It Permissible to Impose and Offset Risks? A Response to Barry and Cullity\",\"authors\":\"Brian Berkey\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/729709\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Christian Barry and Garrett Cullity argue that there is a morally important distinction between offsetting by “sequestering” and offsetting by “forestalling.” They further claim that offsetting by sequestering will often make risk-imposing actions permissible, while offsetting by forestalling typically will not. In this article, I highlight some reasons to be skeptical about their view and suggest an alternative account of the conditions in which offsetting can make a risk-imposing action permissible. In addition, I note a significant implication of my argument for the ethics of greenhouse gas offsetting.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/729709\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/729709","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

Christian Barry 和 Garrett Cullity 认为，"封存 "抵消和 "阻止 "抵消在道德上有重要区别。他们进一步声称，通过 "封存 "来抵消通常会使增加风险的行为成为可允许的行为，而通过 "阻止 "来抵消通常不会。在这篇文章中，我强调了对他们的观点持怀疑态度的一些理由，并对抵消可以使增加风险的行动被允许的条件提出了另一种解释。此外，我还指出了我的论点对温室气体抵消伦理的重要影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

When Is It Permissible to Impose and Offset Risks? A Response to Barry and Cullity

Christian Barry and Garrett Cullity argue that there is a morally important distinction between offsetting by “sequestering” and offsetting by “forestalling.” They further claim that offsetting by sequestering will often make risk-imposing actions permissible, while offsetting by forestalling typically will not. In this article, I highlight some reasons to be skeptical about their view and suggest an alternative account of the conditions in which offsetting can make a risk-imposing action permissible. In addition, I note a significant implication of my argument for the ethics of greenhouse gas offsetting.

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 Multiple-

CiteScore

2.90

自引率

1.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Ethics is a scholarly journal that covers a range of topics pertaining to moral, political, and legal philosophy. It includes articles from various intellectual perspectives, such as social and political theory, law, and economics. The journal presents new theories, applies theory to contemporary moral issues, and focuses on historical works that have significant implications for contemporary theory. In addition to major articles, Ethics also publishes critical discussions, symposia, review essays, and book reviews. Articles published in Ethics are indexed in several abstracting and indexing services, including Ulrich's Periodicals Directory (Print), Ulrichsweb (Online), J-Gate, HINARI, Clarivate Analytics, De Gruyter Saur, EBSCOhost, Elsevier BV, PubMed, ProQuest, and others.