Theoria 11 (3):61-81 (1996)
The aim of my paper is to explore in some detail some epistemological issues concerning moral theorizing on global warming. First, I consider the issue of the structure of the theoretical approach in a field of inquiry requiring normative assessments. How do theoretical principles work here? What is to be regarded as a normative evidence for such a theory? Second, the criteria to determine which part, if any, of the theory gets normatively constrained, and which does not, are discussed. Third, I focus on the procedures to reach an equilibrium between such a theory and its evidence and to reach it, changes might be required on the normative side of the theory, rather than on its non-normative one
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
The Role of the Affect Heuristic in Moral Reactions to Climate Change.Mark A. Seabright - 2010 - Journal of Global Ethics 6 (1):5-15.
The Lomborg Deception: Setting the Record Straight About Global Warming.Howard Friel - 2010 - Yale University Press.
Are Philosophers Responsible for Global Warming?Nicholas Maxwell - 2008 - Philosophy Now 65 (65):12-13.
Moral Theory and Theorizing in Health Care Ethics.Hugh Upton - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):431-443.
Beyond the Bottom Line: The Theoretical Goals of Moral Theorizing.Jason Brennan - 2008 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 28 (2):277-296.
Global Warming and Our Natural Duties of Justice.Aaron Maltais - 2008 - Dissertation, Uppsala University
Response to the Global Warming Tragedy. Global Warming: More Common Than Tragic.Elizabeth R. DeSombre - 2004 - Ethics and International Affairs 18 (1):41–46.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads46 ( #111,883 of 2,158,921 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #132,304 of 2,158,921 )
How can I increase my downloads?