This chapter introduces the main idea and motivation behind precautionary principles (PPs) and gives an overview of different PP interpretations according to their functions: action-guiding, epistemic, procedural, and integrated interpretations are distinguished. The chapter then describes the main lines of arguments that have been presented in favor of PPs before presenting the most important objections that PPs face, along with possible rejoinders.
This chapter describes the design of a case study for testing whether reflective equilibrium (RE) can be successfully applied. This includes defining the pragmatic-epistemic objective, specifying the RE criteria and the steps of the process of application, and identifying and describing the input of the RE application.
Reflective equilibrium (RE)—the idea that we have to justify our judgments and principles through a process of mutual adjustment—is taken to be a central method in philosophy. Nonetheless, conceptions of RE often stay sketchy, and there is a striking lack of explicit and traceable applications of it. This paper presents an explicit case study for the application of an elaborate RE conception. RE is used to reconstruct the arguments from Thomson’s paper “Turning the Trolley” for why a bystander must not divert a runaway trolley from five workmen onto one. Analyzing Thomson’s resulting position with the RE-criteria has two main results: Firstly, the adjustment of one of her commitments can be defended. Secondly, no justified position in RE was reached. With respect to RE as a method, the main results from this application are: (1) There is at least one conception of RE that is sufficiently specified to be applicable; (2) the RE criteria put real constraints on the process of justification; and (3) an explicit application of RE has benefits in terms of clarity while at the same time providing guidance for how the justificatory process could be continued.
This chapter summarizes the main points of the book and asks what we can learn for reflective equilibrium (RE) and its use as a method in philosophy. It highlights that (1) reflective equilibrium could be specified as an applicable method which puts real constraints on justification; and (2) applying reflective equilibrium as a method did contribute to the desiderata for justifying a precautionary principle. Taking a step back from the case study, the chapter argues that while RE can be specified as a method, it might often be more fruitful to adopt it as a methodology.
The precautionary principle (PP) is an influential principle for making decisions when facing uncertain, but potentially severe, harm. However, there is a persistent disagreement about what the principle entails, exactly. It exists in a multitude of formulations and has potentially conflicting ideas associated with it. Is there even such a thing as ‘the precautionary principle’? This paper analyses the debate between unificationists and pluralists about ‘the PP’, arguing that the debate is hindered by neglecting the question of justification. It introduces reflective equilibrium as a method of justification, and sketches how it could be applied to justify a PP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.