Results and Discussion: Justifying a Precautionary Principle as a Case Study for Reflective Equilibrium

Abstract

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.

One Health, Ecological Bioethics, and the Ethics of Zoonoses: A call for Global Action

“…First, the best way forward in implementing a planetary health approach is to act preventively under the kaleidoscope of caution, eco-wisdom and responsibility from a comprehensive One Health for all, including value claims and the interests of humans, animals and environments. (Origgi, 2014;Rechnitzer, 2022;Sandin, 1999; Van Herten & Bovenkerk, 2021) As noted early by Potter (Muzur e tal., 2016; Potter, 1973Potter, , 1992Potter, , 19962001;Valera, 2017;Rodríguez, 2021), human and animal healthcare practices generate a large amount of waste and pollution that can harm the environment and have long-term and systemic effects on planetary health. The ecological footprint due to plastics, syringes, solid and liquid waste, etc., and the energy expenditure of hospitals is a problem of growing concern for the management of zoonotic diseases and EIDs.…”

Pragmatist reflective equilibrium

“…However, explicating and formalizing the stages itself does not make the outcome of the process more reliable, as it still relies on crucial choices and stipulations at each stage of the process, and these choices and stipulations cannot be justified in a similar strict way. Explication makes the process retraceable, but it does not make the input or the process more reliable.101 For a similar conclusion, seeRechnitzer (2022).…”

“…16 More importantly, it seems as if after a common ground in Goodman (1955), the two discourses have developed independently. In the practical philosophy discourse, Norman Daniels' interpretation of Rawls is dominant, whereas Goodman and Elgin have inspired various authors from Switzerland and Germany, including the editors of this collection of essays and Tanja Rechnitzer (2022). Yet, the core authors do not refer to each other, let alone that they discuss each other.…”

“…For overviews of the literature and discussions of various critiques, seeAmaya (2015),Daniels (1996), DePaul (1993,Norman (1998),Rechnitzer (2022),Scanlon (2002),Tersman (1993),Van der Burg and Van Willigenburg (1998a, 1998b).3 Rawls (1971/1999, pp. xviii and 221-227).4 Various authors have suggested a pragmatist reading of reflective equilibrium: for example Botti (2019),Goodman and Elgin (1988),Nielsen (1994).5 I will therefore try to ignore controversies about concepts like rationality, knowledge and experience, on which pragmatists differ among themselves.…”

“…For a complete rejection as methodologically irrelevant and undefensible, seeMcPherson (2015) Beisbart et al, (2021). andRechnitzer (2022) suggest an interesting approach to counter the criticism that reflective equilibrium is not strict enough, by making the steps more precise and formal. This approach makes the reasoning process more retraceable, controllable and open for criticism.…”