Environmental Ethics 6 (1):57-69 (1984)
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||Applied Philosophy General Interest|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Ethics and Energy Supplement.Mark A. Stevenson & Victor S. Godden - 1992 - Journal of Business Ethics 11 (8):609 - 615.
Ethics and Energy Supplement.Mark Stevenson & Victor S. Godden - 1991 - Journal of Business Ethics 10 (8):609 - 615.
Similar books and articles
An Uncomfortable Responsibility: Ethics and Nuclear Waste.Mats Andren - 2012 - The European Legacy 17 (1):71 - 82.
Power, Coercion, and Morality.Richard Harries - 1983 - In Francis Bridger (ed.), The Cross and the Bomb: Christian Ethics and the Nuclear Debate. Mowbray.
Equity and Nuclear Waste Disposal.Kristin Shrader-Frechette - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (2):133-156.
Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea.Sheila Jasanoff & Sang-Hyun Kim - 2009 - Minerva 47 (2):119-146.
The Cross and the Bomb: Christian Ethics and the Nuclear Debate.Francis Bridger (ed.) - 1983 - Mowbray.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #329,777 of 2,158,481 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #354,694 of 2,158,481 )
How can I increase my downloads?