Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2645–2661 |
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | Philosophia (United States) |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| Early online date | 28 Sept 2022 |
| Publication status | Published - Nov 2022 |
Abstract
The precautionary principle (PP) is an influential principle for making decisions when facing uncertain, but potentially severe, harm. However, there is a persistent disagreement about what the principle entails, exactly. It exists in a multitude of formulations and has potentially conflicting ideas associated with it. Is there even such a thing as ‘the precautionary principle’? This paper analyses the debate between unificationists and pluralists about ‘the PP’, arguing that the debate is hindered by neglecting the question of justification. It introduces reflective equilibrium as a method of justification, and sketches how it could be applied to justify a PP.
Keywords
- Conceptual Re-Engineering, Empty-Label Challenge, Justification, Pluralism, Precautionary Principle, Reflective Equilibrium, Unification
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Arts and Humanities(all)
- Philosophy
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Philosophia (United States), Vol. 50, No. 5, 11.2022, p. 2645–2661.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Unifying ‘the’ Precautionary Principle? Justification and Reflective Equilibrium
AU - Rechnitzer, Tanja
N1 - Funding Information: This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation under Grant No. 150251. Earlier versions were presented in Bern, Bielefeld and Rom. I would like to thank the various audiences and in particular Marius Baumann, Claus Beisbart, Jonas Blatter, Georg Brun, Andreas Christiansen, Annabel Colas, Catherine Z. Elgin, Stephen Gardiner, Sven Ove Hansson, Lauren Hartzell-Nichols, David Hopf, Johanna Privitera and Maria Serban for helpful comments and discussions. The paper also benefited greatly from the constructive criticism of an anonymous reviewer for this journal, as well as comments from another anonymous reviewer on an earlier version.
PY - 2022/11
Y1 - 2022/11
N2 - The precautionary principle (PP) is an influential principle for making decisions when facing uncertain, but potentially severe, harm. However, there is a persistent disagreement about what the principle entails, exactly. It exists in a multitude of formulations and has potentially conflicting ideas associated with it. Is there even such a thing as ‘the precautionary principle’? This paper analyses the debate between unificationists and pluralists about ‘the PP’, arguing that the debate is hindered by neglecting the question of justification. It introduces reflective equilibrium as a method of justification, and sketches how it could be applied to justify a PP.
AB - The precautionary principle (PP) is an influential principle for making decisions when facing uncertain, but potentially severe, harm. However, there is a persistent disagreement about what the principle entails, exactly. It exists in a multitude of formulations and has potentially conflicting ideas associated with it. Is there even such a thing as ‘the precautionary principle’? This paper analyses the debate between unificationists and pluralists about ‘the PP’, arguing that the debate is hindered by neglecting the question of justification. It introduces reflective equilibrium as a method of justification, and sketches how it could be applied to justify a PP.
KW - Conceptual Re-Engineering
KW - Empty-Label Challenge
KW - Justification
KW - Pluralism
KW - Precautionary Principle
KW - Reflective Equilibrium
KW - Unification
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85139142628&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11406-022-00582-0
DO - 10.1007/s11406-022-00582-0
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85139142628
VL - 50
SP - 2645
EP - 2661
JO - Philosophia (United States)
JF - Philosophia (United States)
SN - 0048-3893
IS - 5
ER -