Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Environmental Risks, Uncertainty and Intergenerational Ethics.Kristian Skagen Ekeli - 2004 - Environmental Values 13 (4):421-448.
    The way our decisions and actions can affect future generations is surrounded by uncertainty. This is evident in current discussions of environmental risks related to global climate change, biotechnology and the use and storage of nuclear energy. The aim of this paper is to consider more closely how uncertainty affects our moral responsibility to future generations, and to what extent moral agents can be held responsible for activities that inflict risks on future people. It is argued that our moral responsibility (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Giving a voice to posterity – deliberative democracy and representation of future people.Kristian Skagen Ekeli - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (5):429-450.
    The aim of this paper is to consider whether some seats in a democratically elected legislative assembly ought to be reserved for representatives of future generations. In order to examine this question, I will propose a new democratic model for representing posterity. It is argued that this model has several advantages compared with a model for the democratic representation of future people previously suggested by Andrew Dobson. Nevertheless, the democratic model that I propose confronts at least two difficult problems. First, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • Arguing about climate change: judging the handling of climate risk to future generations by.M. D. Davidson - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)The Future - For Better or Worse.Ernest Partridge - 2002 - Environmental Values 11 (1):75-85.
    Alan Carter correctly argues that Thomas Schwartz's 'future persons paradox' applies with equal force to utilitarianism, rights theory and Aristotelian ethics. His criticism of Rawls's 'justice between generations' is less successful, because of his failure (and perhaps Rawls's as well) to fully appreciate the hypothetical nature of the 'original position'. Carter's attempt to refute Schwartz's argument by focusing on the individuality of moral action fails, since it evades the essential point of Schwartz's argument. The best response to Schwartz is to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations