You are accessing PhilPapers from Open University (UK), an institution that is not subscribed to PhilPapers. Starting on July 1, 2014, we ask institutions that grant philosophy degrees and are based in high-GDP countries to contribute to PhilPapers' maintenance and development through a subscription. See this page for details. Please show your support by contacting your librarian.
9 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Kristian Skagen Ekeli (University of Stavanger)
  1. Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2012). Liberalism and Permissible Suppression of Illiberal Ideas. Inquiry 55 (2):171-193.
    The purpose of this paper is to consider the following question: To what extent is it permissible for a liberal democratic state to suppress the spread of illiberal ideas (including anti-democratic ideas)? I will discuss two approaches to this question. The first can be termed the clear and imminent danger approach, and the second the preventive approach. The clear and imminent danger approach implies that it is permissible for liberal states to suppress the spread of illiberal doctrines and ideas only (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2012). The Political Rights of Anti-Liberal-Democratic Groups. Law and Philosophy 31 (3):269-297.
    The purpose of this paper is to consider whether it is permissible for a liberal democratic state to deny anti-liberal-democratic citizens and groups the right to run for parliament. My answer to this question is twofold. On the one hand, I will argue that it is, in principle, permissible for liberal democratic states to deny anti-liberal-democratic citizens and groups the right to run for parliament. On the other hand, I will argue that it is rarely wise (or prudent) for ripe (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Kristian Skagen Ekeli & Espen Gamlund (2011). Reconsidering Approaches to Moral Status. Ethics, Policy and Environment 14 (3):361 - 375.
    Ethics, Policy & Environment, Volume 14, Issue 3, Page 361-375, October 2011.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Kristian skagen Ekeli (2009). Constitutional Experiments: Representing Future Generations Through Submajority Rules. Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (4):440-461.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2007). Green Constitutionalism: The Constitutional Protection of Future Generations. Ratio Juris 20 (3):378-401.
  6. Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2007). How Difficult Should It Be to Amend Constitutional Laws? Scandinavian Studies in Law 52:79-101.
    The purpose of this paper is to consider some aspects of the question of how difficult it should be to amend or change constitutional laws through formal amendment procedures. The point of departure of my discussion is an amendment procedure that has recently been suggested by the prominent legal and political philosopher Bruce Ackerman. He defends a three-step amendment procedure – where a re-elected president is authorised to propose amendments that must thereafter be approved first by a two-thirds majority of (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2006). The Principle of Liberty and Legal Representation of Posterity. Res Publica 12 (4):385-409.
    This paper considers a guardianship model for the legal representation of future generations. According to this model, national and international courts should be given the competence to appoint guardians for future generations, if agents who care about the welfare of posterity apply for the creation of a guardianship in relation to a dispute that can be resolved by the application of law. This reform would grant guardians of future people legal standing or locus standi before courts, that is, the right (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2005). Giving a Voice to Posterity – Deliberative Democracy and Representation of Future People. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (5):429-450.
    The aim of this paper is to consider whether some seats in a democratically elected legislative assembly ought to be reserved for representatives of future generations. In order to examine this question, I will propose a new democratic model for representing posterity. It is argued that this model has several advantages compared with a model for the democratic representation of future people previously suggested by Andrew Dobson. Nevertheless, the democratic model that I propose confronts at least two difficult problems. First, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2004). Environmental Risks, Uncertainty and Intergenerational Ethics. Environmental Values 13 (4):421-448.
    The way our decisions and actions can affect future generations is surrounded by uncertainty. This is evident in current discussions of environmental risks related to global climate change, biotechnology and the use and storage of nuclear energy. The aim of this paper is to consider more closely how uncertainty affects our moral responsibility to future generations, and to what extent moral agents can be held responsible for activities that inflict risks on future people. It is argued that our moral responsibility (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation