Switch to: References

Citations of:

Consumer Choice and Collective Impact

In Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson & Tyler Doggett (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Food Ethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 267-286 (2017)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Participation and Superfluity.Jan Willem Wieland & Rutger van Oeveren - 2020 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 17 (2):163-187.
    Why act when the effects of one’s act are negligible? For example, why boycott sweatshop or animal products if doing so makes no difference for the better? According to recent proposals, one may still have a reason to boycott in order to avoid complicity or participation in harm. Julia Nefsky has argued that accounts of this kind suffer from the so-called “superfluity problem,” basically the question of why agents can be said to participate in harm if they make no difference (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Veganism, Animal Welfare, and Causal Impotence.Samuel Kahn - 2020 - Journal of Animal Ethics 10 (2):161-176.
    Proponents of the utilitarian animal welfare argument (AWA) for veganism maintain that it is reasonable to expect that adopting a vegan diet will decrease animal suffering. In this paper I argue otherwise. I maintain that (i) there are plausible scenarios in which refraining from meat-consumption will not decrease animal suffering; (ii) the utilitarian AWA rests on a false dilemma; and (iii) there are no reasonable grounds for the expectation that adopting a vegan diet will decrease animal suffering. The paper is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Social norms and farm animal protection.Nicolas Delon - 2018 - Palgrave Communications 4:1-6.
    Social change is slow and difficult. Social change for animals is formidably slow and difficult. Advocates and scholars alike have long tried to change attitudes and convince the public that eating animals is wrong. The topic of norms and social change for animals has been neglected, which explains in part the relative failure of the animal protection movement to secure robust support reflected in social and legal norms. Moreover, animal ethics has suffered from a disproportionate focus on individual attitudes and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Intensive Animal Agriculture and Human Health.Jonathan Anomaly - 2019 - In Bob Fischer (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Animal Ethics. New York: Routledge.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Inefficacy, Despair, and Difference-Making: A Secular Application of Kant's Moral Argument.Andrew Chignell - 2022 - In Luigi Caranti & Alessandro Pinzani (eds.), Kant and the Problem of Morality: Rethinking the Contemporary World. New York, NY: Routledge Chapman & Hall. pp. 47-72.
    Those of us who enjoy certain products of the global industrial economy but also believe it is wrong to consume them are often so demoralized by the apparent inefficacy of our individual, private choices that we are unable to resist. Although he was a deontologist, Kant was clearly aware of this ‘consequent-dependent’ side of our moral psychology. One version of his ‘moral proof’ is designed to respond to the threat of such demoralization in pursuit of the Highest Good. That version (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Ethical Veganism and Free Riding.Jacob Barrett & Sarah Raskoff - 2023 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 24 (2):184-212.
    The animal agriculture industry causes animals a tremendous amount of pain and suffering. Many ethical vegans argue that we therefore have an obligation to abstain from animal products in order to reduce this suffering. But this argument faces a challenge: thanks to the size and structure of the animal agriculture industry, any individual’s dietary choices are overwhelmingly unlikely to make a difference. In this paper, we criticize common replies to this challenge and develop an alternative argument for ethical veganism. Specifically, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The inefficacy objection and new ethical veganism.Lucia Schwarz - forthcoming - Journal of Social Philosophy.
    Journal of Social Philosophy, EarlyView.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Climate Change and Individual Obligations: A Dilemma for the Expected Utility Approach, and the Need for an Imperfect View.Julia Nefsky - 2021 - In Budolfson Mark, McPherson Tristram & Plunkett David (eds.), Philosophy and Climate Change. Oxford University Press. pp. 201-221.
    This chapter concerns the nature of our obligations as individuals when it comes to our emissions-producing activities and climate change. The first half of the chapter argues that the popular ‘expected utility’ approach to this question faces a problematic dilemma: either it gives skeptical verdicts, saying that there are no such obligations, or it yields implausibly strong verdicts. The second half of the chapter diagnoses the problem. It is argued that the dilemma arises from a very general feature of the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Structural Injustice and the Emotions.Nicholas Smyth - 2021 - Res Publica 27 (4):577-592.
    A structural harm results from countless apparently innocuous interactions between a great many individuals in a social system, and not from any agent’s intentionally producing the harm. Iris Young has influentially articulated a model of individual moral responsibility for such harms, and several other philosophers have taken it as their starting point for dealing with the phenomenon of structural injustice. In this paper, I argue that this social connection model is far less realistic and socially effective than it aims to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Collective harm and the inefficacy problem.Julia Nefsky - 2019 - Philosophy Compass 14 (4):e12587.
    This paper discusses the inefficacy problem that arises in contexts of “collective harm.‘ These are contexts in which by acting in a certain sort of way, people collectively cause harm, or fail to prevent it, but no individual act of the relevant sort seems to itself make a difference. The inefficacy problem is that if acting in the relevant way won’t make a difference, it’s unclear why it would be wrong. Each individual can argue, “things will be just as bad (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   47 citations  
  • Moral vegetarianism.Tyler Doggett - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Shopping with a Conscience? The Epistemic Case for Relinquishment over Conscientious Consumption.Ewan Kingston - 2021 - Business Ethics Quarterly 31 (2):242-274.
    Many people argue that we should practice conscientious consumption. Faced with goods from gravely flawed production processes, such as wood from clear-cut rainforests or electronics containing conflict minerals, they argue that we should enact personal policies to routinely shun tainted goods and select pure goods. However, consumers typically should be relatively uncertain about which flaws in global supply chains are grave and the connection of purchases to those grave flaws. The threat of significant uncertainty makes conscientious consumption appear to be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Indeterminacy and impotence.Benjamin Hale - 2022 - Synthese 200 (3):1-24.
    Recent work in applied ethics has advanced a raft of arguments regarding individual responsibilities to address collective challenges like climate change or the welfare and environmental impacts of meat production. Frequently, such arguments suggest that individual actors have a responsibility to be more conscientious with their consumption decisions, that they can and should harness the power of the market to bring about a desired outcome. A common response to these arguments, and a challenge in particular to act-consequentialist reasoning, is that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Freegan Challenge to Veganism.Bob Fischer & Josh Milburn - 2021 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 34 (3):1-19.
    There is a surprising consensus among vegan philosophers that freeganism—eating animal-based foods going to waste—is permissible. Some ethicists even argue that vegans should be freegans. In this paper, we offer a novel challenge to freeganism drawing upon Donaldson and Kymlicka’s ‘zoopolitical’ approach, which supports ‘restricted freeganism’. On this position, it’s prima facie wrong to eat the corpses of domesticated animals, as they are members of a mixed human-animal community, ruling out many freegan practices. This exploration reveals how the ‘political turn’ (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Participation and Degrees.Jan Willem Wieland - 2022 - Utilitas 34 (1):39-56.
    What's wrong with joining corona parties? In this article, I defend the idea that reasons to avoid such parties come in degrees. I approach this issue from a participation-based perspective. Specifically, I argue that the more people are already joining the party, and the more likely it is that the virus will spread among everyone, the stronger the participation-based reason not to join. In defense of these degrees, I argue that they covary with the expression of certain attitudes.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Disgust and the logic of contamination: Biology, culture, and the evolution of norm (over)compliance.Isaac Wiegman & Bob Fischer - 2022 - Mind and Language 37 (5):993-1010.
    Many people feel compelled to disassociate themselves from wrongdoing. We call judgments to the effect “disassociation intuitions.” Do disassociation intuitions have a common cause? Why do they seem so obvious and resistant to countervailing reasons? How did they become so widespread? Here, we argue that disassociation intuitions are a natural product of gene‐culture co‐evolution. We also consider the mechanism that gene‐culture co‐evolution employed to achieve this result, arguing that a plausible candidate is disgust and its cultural echoes. This theory of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark