Climate Change—Do I Make a Difference?

Gesang, Bernward

doi:10.5840/enviroethics20179261

Cited by 35 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Harris and Galvin 2012). One of the present authors has shown that the symmetry thesis fails in context of climate ethics (Gesang 2017).…”

Section: The Symmetry Thesismentioning

confidence: 67%

“…For each individual action, the probability of setting off the trigger moves in inverse proportion to the amount of harm that can potentially be caused by this action (Matheny 2002). This relation is a key feature of Kagan's argument and is also referred to as the "symmetry thesis" (Gesang 2017). The symmetry thesis has a substantial impact on the EUT calculation: due to the relationship between the triggering number and the caused harm, T is canceled out in the calculation (as it appears in both the numerator and denominator) and thus the EUT remains constant, independently of the actual value of T.…”

Section: The Symmetry Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kagan defends his points empirically by the symmetry thesis. In addition he gives an a priori argument, which one of the authors discusses in detail elsewhere (Gesang 2017). A short overview may be helpful: Let us begin with Parfits harmless torturer problem.…”

Section: The Symmetry Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

To Buy or Not to Buy? The Moral Relevance of the Individual Demand in Everyday Purchase Situations

Gesang¹,

Ullrich²

2020

Food ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question of the moral relevance of the individual demand is fundamental to many purchase decisions of daily consumer life. Can a single purchase make a difference for the better or worse? Each individual consumer could argue that companies are unlikely to adjust their production due to one single item more or less being sold. He might therefore decide not to change his consumption behavior but instead to rely on the effort of others, a pattern commonly referred to as collective action problem. In this article, we study collective action problems with regard to everyday purchase situations. We base our discussion on Shelly Kagan's famous article "Do I make a difference?" and critically discuss a central assumption of his model: the symmetric relationship between supply and demand. We find that Kagan's solution to collective action problems is not true a priori but has to be evaluated in certain empirical surroundings. We therefore discuss the approach in the context of the European meat market and demonstrate that Kagan's argument does not provide a universal solution to cases of meat purchasing. We conclude with an outlook regarding the role of consumer ethics.

show abstract

“…Harris and Galvin 2012). One of the present authors has shown that the symmetry thesis fails in context of climate ethics (Gesang 2017).…”

Section: The Symmetry Thesismentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: The Symmetry Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

To Buy or Not to Buy? The Moral Relevance of the Individual Demand in Everyday Purchase Situations

Gesang¹,

Ullrich²

2020

Food ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whether it does or not depends on the probabilities and on the goodness and badness of the relevant consequences" [12]. I have shown that the symmetry thesis fails in the context of climate ethics [9].…”

Section: Plos Sustainability and Transformationmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…I have studied problems of collective action in the context of purchase situations and especially in the context of emission situations [9]. With my purchases or my emissions, can I make any difference for better or worse?…”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protecting our future: What contribution can I make?

Gesang

2022

PLOS Sustain Transform

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(A) The crises related to climate and the economy endanger future and current generations but altering the small impact or minimal emissions of an individual person is—because of the failure of political coordination—not the best way to overcome these crises. (B) When we act as individuals to act as stopgaps for policy to minimise the mountain of problems, the following applies: We should not waste our energies on limited involvements in small, primarily symbolic collaborations but should instead endeavour to make the biggest difference of which we are capable with regard to improving the world. (C) We make the biggest difference when our limited budget for improving the world is used against poverty, for example, and combatting poverty is precisely what brings positive side effects with regard to human rights and the protection of the climate, animals, and species. For example, support for poor farmers in rain forests can save those rain forests. Every CO2 calculator demonstrates that commitment to the Third World is up to 50 times more efficient than reduction of personal emissions.

show abstract

Symbolic value and the limits of good‐for theory

Abma

2024

Nous

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Good‐for theorists claim that to be valuable is to be good for someone, in the sense of being beneficial for them. Their opponents deny this, arguing that some things are good‐simpliciter: good independently of being good for anyone. In this article I argue in favor of good‐simpliciter. I appeal to the category of symbolically valuable acts, acts which seem valuable even when they do not benefit anyone and even when they are costly to the agent. I explore various strategies a good‐for theorist might pursue to address these apparently valuable acts, for example by appealing to the acts’ connection to beneficial character traits or practices, and I argue that none of these strategies succeed. Instead, I propose that the best way to understand the value of these acts involves seeing them as appropriate responses to what is good‐simpliciter, and more specifically, as ways of loving what is worthy of love.

show abstract

Climate Change—Do I Make a Difference?

Cited by 35 publications

References 0 publications

To Buy or Not to Buy? The Moral Relevance of the Individual Demand in Everyday Purchase Situations

To Buy or Not to Buy? The Moral Relevance of the Individual Demand in Everyday Purchase Situations

Protecting our future: What contribution can I make?

Symbolic value and the limits of good‐for theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About