In a world of rapidly advancing technological innovation, a case has been made to prioritize potential long-term benefits to future generations over the interests of those currently alive. Proponents of this approach, called longtermists,... more
In a world of rapidly advancing technological innovation, a case has been made to prioritize potential long-term benefits to future generations over the interests of those currently alive. Proponents of this approach, called longtermists, support investments in technology to avoid existential risks. They claim technology will eventually "solve" climate change, while ignoring technopower reduction as a potential solution to global environmental catastrophe. Democratic control over technology mitigates some of these harms, yet falls short of the authors' proposed level of oversight. In this paper, we consider the ethical hazards of longtermists' stance. An ethical dilemma emerges from the devastating effect some technological advancements have on the environment. While we recognize the merits of long-term thinking, we argue longtermists' prioritization consolidates power among few technocrats. This prioritization exacerbates existing inequalities instead of redistributing economic and political power to communities most affected by climate change. We posit this trade-off to be unethical.
Research Interests: Artificial Intelligence, Philosophy, Ethics, Applied Ethics, Technology, and 15 moreClimate Change, Climate change policy, Environmental Ethics, Capability Approach, John Locke, Martha Nussbaum, Derek Parfit, Peter Singer, Martha Nussbaum's theory of human capabilities, Existential risk, Ethical dilemmas, Effective Altruism, Nick Bostrom, Toby Ord, and Longtermism
This paper considers the obligation higher income countries have to lower and middle income countries during a global pandemic. Further considers which reforms are needed to the global supply-chain of medical resources. The short-comings... more
This paper considers the obligation higher income countries have to lower and middle income countries during a global pandemic. Further considers which reforms are needed to the global supply-chain of medical resources. The short-comings in distribution and medical infrastructure have exacerbated the health crisis in developing countries. Global justice demands radical redistribution of medical resources in order to prevent mass casualties. This is argued first by highlighting that the COVID-19 pandemic should be acknowledged as an issue of global justice, secondly, higher income countries ought to account for distribution inequity as a matter of rectifying past injustices, and thirdly argue for reform in distribution while considering the vaccine rollout as a prime example. We aim to show how the differences from country to country in response capabilities are a result of the economic foundation colonialism established and a direct result of cyclical poverty, which wealthy countrie...
Research Interests:
This paper considers the ethical obligation high income countries (HIC) have to lower and middle income countries (LMIC) during a global pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the shortcomings of distributing scarce medical resources... more
This paper considers the ethical obligation high income countries (HIC) have to lower and middle income countries (LMIC) during a global pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the shortcomings of distributing scarce medical resources according to economic bargaining power and of responding to the global health crisis with national isolation. This paper will present a pragmatic argument against vaccine nationalism and arguments for a more cosmopolitan approach. We argue that vaccines and medical equipment should have been distributed according to Brock's needs-based minimum floor principles, thus defending positions of vaccine Sufficientarianism. HIC ought to adopt such a strategy based on, 1. the duty to rectify past injustices from colonisation, and 2. a negative duty not to uphold unjust institutions and to contribute to radical inequalities. Finally, three practical steps to improve the vaccine rollout are advocated for: HIC should redistribute the excess vaccine doses to LMIC rather than letting doses go to waste; necessary infrastructure to mobilise medical supplies and healthcare staff to administer vaccine doses; and patents should be suspended to prioritise saving lives.
