Southwest Philosophy Review 36 (1):161-168 (2020)

Authors
Alastair Norcross
University of Colorado, Boulder
Abstract
Many significant harms, such as the mass suffering of animals on factory farms, can only be prevented, or at least lessened, by the collective action of thousands, or in some cases millions, of individual agents. In the face of this, it can seem as if individuals are powerless to make a difference, and thus that they lack reasons, at least from the consequentialist perspective, to refrain from eating meat. This has become known as the “causal impotence” problem. The standard response is to appeal to expected utility calculations. Recently, this response has been attacked, mostly on the grounds that the relevant causal mechanisms are more complex than its proponents are said to assume. In this paper, I argue that the attacks are unsuccessful, both at undermining specific expected utility calculations urged by me and Kagan, or even at showing that significantly different expected utility calculations wouldn’t justify the relevant behavior.
Keywords Conference Proceedings  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.5840/swphilreview202036118
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,259
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

In Defense of the Basic Argument for Vegetarianism.James Simpson - 2021 - Journal of Animal Ethics 11 (2):53-59.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Veganism, Animal Welfare, and Causal Impotence.Samuel Kahn - 2020 - Journal of Animal Ethics 10 (2):161.
Potency and Permissibility.Clayton Littlejohn - 2016 - In Ben Bramble & Bob Fischer (eds.), Stirring the Pot: The Moral Complexities of Eating Meat. Oxford University Press.
Causal Impotence and Eating Meat.Alastair Norcross - 2008 - Southwest Philosophy Review 24 (2):5-10.
Collective Action Problems and Conflicting Obligations.Brian Talbot - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (9):2239-2261.
Animals and Causal Impotence: A Deontological View.Blake Hereth - 2016 - Between the Species 19 (1):32-51.
The Case Against Meat.Ben Bramble - 2015 - In Ben Bramble Bob Fischer (ed.), The Moral Complexities of Eating Meat. Oxford University Press.
Descartes, Davidson a kauzalní impotence mysli.T. Hribek - 1996 - Filosoficky Casopis 44 (5):863-884.
Decision-Value Utilitarianism.Wesley Cooper - 2008 - Polish Journal of Philosophy 2 (2):39-50.
Consequentialism, Animal Ethics, and the Value of Valuing.Timothy Perrine - 2020 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 37 (3):485-501.
Causal Inefficacy and Utilitarian Arguments Against the Consumption of Factory-Farmed Products.Moti Gorin - 2017 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 30 (4):585-594.
Collective Action Problems, Causal Impotence, and Virtue.Moti Gorin - 2019 - Southwest Philosophy Review 35 (2):27-30.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-04-23

Total views
129 ( #91,684 of 2,518,692 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
33 ( #26,477 of 2,518,692 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes