|
Showing 1 - 2 of
2 matches in All Departments
How ought we evaluate the individual and collective actions on
which the existence, numbers and identities of future people
depend? In the briefest of terms, this question poses what is
addressed here as the problem of contingent future persons, and as
such it poses relatively novel challenges for philosophical and
theological ethicists. For though it may be counter-intuitive, it
seems that those contingent future persons who are actually brought
into existence by such actions cannot benefit from or be harmed by
these actions in any conventional sense of the terms. This
intriguing problem was defined almost three decades ago by Jan
Narveson [2], and to date its implications have been explored most
exhaustively by Derek Parfit [3] and David Heyd [1]. Nevertheless,
as yet there is simply no consensus on how we ought to evaluate
such actions or, indeed, on whether we can. Still, the pursuit of a
solution to the problem has been interestingly employed by moral
philosophers to press the limits of ethics and to urge a
reconsideration of the nature and source of value at its most
fundamental level. It is thus proving to be a very fruitful
investigation, with far-reaching theoretical and practical
implications.
How ought we evaluate the individual and collective actions on
which the existence, numbers and identities of future people
depend? In the briefest of terms, this question poses what is
addressed here as the problem of contingent future persons, and as
such it poses relatively novel challenges for philosophical and
theological ethicists. For though it may be counter-intuitive, it
seems that those contingent future persons who are actually brought
into existence by such actions cannot benefit from or be harmed by
these actions in any conventional sense of the terms. This
intriguing problem was defined almost three decades ago by Jan
Narveson [2], and to date its implications have been explored most
exhaustively by Derek Parfit [3] and David Heyd [1]. Nevertheless,
as yet there is simply no consensus on how we ought to evaluate
such actions or, indeed, on whether we can. Still, the pursuit of a
solution to the problem has been interestingly employed by moral
philosophers to press the limits of ethics and to urge a
reconsideration of the nature and source of value at its most
fundamental level. It is thus proving to be a very fruitful
investigation, with far-reaching theoretical and practical
implications.
|
You may like...
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R205
R168
Discovery Miles 1 680
Not available
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R205
R168
Discovery Miles 1 680
|