Graduate studies at Western
Environmental Ethics 6 (1):57-69 (1984)
|Abstract||Many arguments for and against nuclear power can be analyzed according to a matrix of logically competing claims on the need and safety of nuclear power. Logical analysis of the arguments reveals their philosophical basis and contributes to an understanding of their explanatory appeal. The evidential value of claims made in the arguments of both supporters and opponents depends upon familiar issues in the philosophy of language and the philosophy of science|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Robert E. Goodin (1985). Disarming Nuclear Apologists. Inquiry 28 (1-4):153 – 176.
Mats Andren (2012). An Uncomfortable Responsibility: Ethics and Nuclear Waste. The European Legacy 17 (1):71 - 82.
Richard Harries (1983). Power, Coercion, and Morality. In Francis Bridger (ed.), The Cross and the Bomb: Christian Ethics and the Nuclear Debate. Mowbray.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1994). Equity and Nuclear Waste Disposal. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (2):133-156.
Sheila Jasanoff & Sang-Hyun Kim (2009). Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva 47 (2):119-146.
Francis Bridger (ed.) (1983). The Cross and the Bomb: Christian Ethics and the Nuclear Debate. Mowbray.
Henry Shue (ed.) (1989). Nuclear Deterrence and Moral Restraint. Cambridge University Press.
John Levendis, Walter Block & Joseph Morrel (2006). Nuclear Power. Journal of Business Ethics 67 (1):37 - 49.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #189,403 of 739,559 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,559 )
How can I increase my downloads?