Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The distribution of greenhouse gas emissions is not itself what matters from the point of view of justice.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Emissions constitute appropriation of a finite atmospheric commons, making their distribution a matter of distributive justice independent of welfare outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Henry Shue's foundational work on subsistence emissions establishes that the right to emit is itself a morally significant entitlement, not merely derivative of goods produced.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A just shares framework (Caney, Shue) requires that each person's fair portion of atmospheric absorptive capacity be respected, regardless of whether welfare parity is achieved through other means.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Procedural justice traditions (Rawls, Scanlon) hold that how a benefit is produced and distributed matters morally, not only whether outcomes are equal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An agent who achieves a fair welfare level by disproportionately consuming a shared resource wrongs others by foreclosing their equivalent use of that resource, even if welfare metrics appear equal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Greenhouse gas emissions do not matter in themselves to those who generate them or benefit from the goods and services that produce them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Emissions matter only because they are a by-product of activities that serve important human interests (energy use, agriculture, land use).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If two people enjoy an equally fair standard of living but one uses fossil fuels and the other solar energy, there is no injustice to the lower-emitting person, because the person still enjoys the fair distribution of goods.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.