What is it about?
Should the individual omit certain action due to climate change? I argue based on a widely debated interpretation of the categorical imperative, that we should. Since our actions are linked to the impossibility of others (in the future and now) to act as we are about to act, we would make an exception for ourselves, if we continue with the intention. Thus certain actions, for example flying for recreational use, could be morally forbidden.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Climate change is one of the biggest challenges we face as humanity, but it has proven increasingly hard for ethics to argue for individual duties. My account applies one of the most important ethical concepts to climate change in a novel way.
Perspectives
Unfortunately it is in German, but I'm happy to discuss the ideas in English, if you are interested, send me a mail. This has been the second winner of a German essay competition.
Simon Hollnaicher
Universitat Bielefeld
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Eine Kantische Begründung individueller Klimapflichten, Grazer Philosophische Studien, November 2020, Brill,
DOI: 10.1163/18756735-00000117.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
