8 found
Order:
  1.  35
    Fact-sensitive political theory.Theresa Scavenius - 2019 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 22 (1):5-17.
  2.  80
    Climate Change and Moral Excuse: The Difficulty of Assigning Responsibility to Individuals.Theresa Scavenius - 2018 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (1):1-15.
    A prominent argument in the climate ethical literature is that individual polluters are responsible for paying the costs of climate change.1 By contrast, I argue that we have reason to excuse individual agents morally for their contributions to climate change. This paper explores some of the possible constraints agents may face when they try to avoid harming the climate, constraints that might be acceptable reasons for excusing people’s contributions to climate change. Two lines of arguments are discussed. The first concerns (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  36
    Introduction.Theresa Scavenius & Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen - 2019 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 22 (1):1-4.
  4. Introduction : compromise and disagreement.Christian F. Rostbøll & Theresa Scavenius - 2017 - In Christian F. Rostbøll & Theresa Scavenius (eds.), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory. New York: Routledge.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  42
    The Issue of No Moral Agency in Climate Change.Theresa Scavenius - 2017 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 30 (2):225-240.
    The dominant methodological assumptions in climate ethical debates are rational-individualistic. The aim of this paper is to examine whether the rational-individualistic methodological framework is compatible with a theory of moral responsibility for climate change. I employ three fitness criteria of moral agency: a normatively significant choice, sufficient knowledge and control. I demonstrate that the rational-individualistic methodology does not provide a framework in which rational agents meet the three criteria. I conclude that rational-individualistic agents are not fit to be held morally (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  29
    Klimaresiliens.Theresa Scavenius & Malene Rudolf Lindberg - 2016 - Slagmark - Tidsskrift for Idéhistorie 73:141-155.
    This article addresses resilience in relation to climate change. Currently, our communities are not resilient to climate changes due to a strikingly limited political and scientific framing of climate change as solely a problem of emissions and individual behaviour. Owing to vulgarized interpretations of individual incentives for climate action, contextual barriers to action and the efficiency of individual climate action, this causes an action deficit on both collective and individual levels. We argue that a paradigm shift is needed in order (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  38
    The indeterminacy failures of moral cosmopolitanism and liberal nationalism.Theresa Scavenius - 2017 - Journal of Global Ethics 13 (2):206-220.
    Much of the discussion on cosmopolitanism and nationalism has focused on their different normative views. The purpose of this article is to shift the attention away from the normative debate to the metatheoretical argument about how we determine moral and political principles independently of each other. I argue that the discussion among proponents of cosmopolitanism and contextualist models boils down to latent methodological and metatheoretical assumptions about what selection of facts are considered politically relevant. In the article, I explore what (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  42
    The Tragedy of the Few.Theresa Scavenius - 2016 - Res Publica 22 (1):53-65.
    In this article I elaborate and defend a rights-based understanding of climate politics, that is, one that takes climate politics to concern the rights to access of natural resources as opposed to people’s economic incentives. The argument contains two parts. The first is negative: to demonstrate that the tragedy of the commons as a story of climate change is inadequate. The second is positive: to suggest a more satisfactory framework, which I call the tragedy of the few. In this view, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark