Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Human Health: A Response to the Causal Impotence Objection.Jeremy R. Garrett - 2007 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 24 (3):223–237.
  • On the Threshold Argument Against Consumer Meat Purchases.Gary Chartier - 2005 - Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (2):233–249.
  • Is there a convincing case for climate veganism?Teea Kortetmäki & Markku Oksanen - 2021 - Agriculture and Human Values 38 (3):729-740.
    Climate change compels us to rethink the ethics of our dietary choices and has become an interesting issue for ethicists concerned about diets, including animal ethicists. The defenders of veganism have found that climate change provides a new reason to support their cause because many animal-based foods have high greenhouse gas emissions. The new style of argumentation, the ‘climatic argument for veganism’, may benefit animals by persuading even those who are not concerned about animals themselves but worry about climate change. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Consequentialism, Collective Action, and Causal Impotence.Tim Aylsworth & Adam Pham - 2020 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 23 (3):336-349.
    This paper offers some refinements to a particular objection to act consequentialism, the “causal impotence” objection. According to proponents of the objection, when we find circumstances in which severe, unnecessary harms result entirely from voluntary acts, it seems as if we should be able to indict at least one act among those acts, but act consequentialism appears to lack the resources to offer this indictment. Our aim is to show is that the most promising response on behalf of act consequentialism, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On the Threshold Argument Against Consumer Meat Purchases.Gary Chartier - 2006 - Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (2):235-51.
    Lodges a number of challenges to the threshold argument on the basis of which some consequentialists have objected to consumer meat purchases. Maintains that the argument misunderstands relevant market dynamics.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • ‘Pass the Cocoamone, Please’: Causal Impotence, Opportunistic Vegetarianism and Act-Utilitarianism.John Richard Harris & Richard Galvin - 2012 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 15 (3):368 - 383.
    It appears that utilitarian arguments in favor of moral vegetarianism cannot justify a complete prohibition of eating meat. This is because, in certain circumstances, forgoing meat will prevent no pain, and so, on utilitarian grounds, we should be opportunistic carnivores rather than moral vegetarians. In his paper, ‘Puppies, pigs, and people: Eating meat and marginal cases,’ Alastair Norcross argues that causal impotence arguments like these are misguided. First, he presents an analogous situation, the case of chocolate mousse a-la-bama, in order (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Climate Change and Causal Inefficacy: Why Go Green When It Makes No Difference?: James Garvey.James Garvey - 2011 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 69:157-174.
    Think of some environmentally unfriendly choices – taking the car instead of public transport or driving an SUV, just binning something recyclable, using lots of plastic bags, buying an enormous television, washing clothes in hot water, replacing something when you could make do with last year's model, heating rooms you don't use or leaving the heating high when you could put on another layer of clothing, flying for holidays, wasting food and water, eating a lot of beef, installing a patio (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations