Change search
Refine search result
1 - 6 of 6
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Torpman, Olle
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Philosophy.
    John Broome Climate Matters – Ethics in a Warming World: 2014In: Theoria, ISSN 0040-5825, E-ISSN 1755-2567, Vol. 80, no 2, p. 191-195Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 2.
    Torpman, Olle
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Philosophy.
    Libertarianism and Climate Change2016Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    In this dissertation, I investigate the implications of libertarian morality in relation to the problem of climate change. This problem is explicated in the first chapter, where preliminary clarifications are also made. In the second chapter, I briefly explain the characteristics of libertarianism relevant to the subsequent study, including the central non-aggression principle. In chapter three, I examine whether our individual emissions of greenhouse gases, which together give rise to climate change, meet this principle. I do this based on the assumption that we are the legitimate owners of the resources we use in those activities. In the fourth chapter, I question this assumption and scrutinize libertarianism’s restrictions on appropriations of climate-relevant resources, which leads me to distinguish between some different versions of the libertarian view. Toward the end of the chapter, I also examine libertarianism’s answer to the political question regarding how emission rights should be distributed. The fifth chapter investigates libertarianism’s verdicts for mere risks of infringement, as stemming from people’s emissions and acts of appropriations. In chapter six, I investigate the libertarian right to self-defense against both the effects of climate change and other people’s climate-relevant activities. In chapter seven, I discuss two intergenerational issues related to climate change: what libertarianism says concerning future generations and how libertarianism might deal with the problem of historical emissions. The eighth chapter explores the implications of libertarianism regarding collective moral wrongdoing in connection to climate change. In chapter nine, I take a look at the libertarian room for governmental responses for tackling climate change. The tenth and final chapter is a summary. The overall conclusion of the dissertation is that libertarianism recommends that we reduce our emissions and decrease our extraction of natural resources such as forests and fossil fuels. Furthermore, governments are permitted to undertake some quite substantial actions in order to fight the causes of climate change. I end with some bottom-up reflections on what these conclusions might say about the plausibility of libertarianism. I claim that although libertarianism after all manages to explain some of our moral intuitions regarding climate change, it is questionable whether libertarianism’s explanation is better than those offered by alternative moral theories.      

  • 3.
    Torpman, Olle
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Philosophy.
    Miljöetik: Från problem till lösning2017Book (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Vi blir allt fler människor på jorden och våra aktiviteter tär på miljön. Vi skövlar regnskogarna, utfiskar haven och släpper ut gifter och koldioxid i atmosfären. Temperaturen höjs, vattennivåer stiger och djurarter hotas av utrotning. Naturkatastrofer och felslagna skördar gör att världens svältsituation förvärras. Med större medvetenhet om de stegrande miljöproblemen aktualiseras frågor om våra moraliska förpliktelser att förhindra denna utveckling. Har vi ett ansvar att stoppa miljöförstöringen? I så fall, gentemot vad eller vem? Och hur ser vårt ansvar ut gentemot kommande generationer? Trots den vetenskapliga enigheten om miljöproblemen står världen oenig om hur de ska lösas. Utgångspunkten i denna bok är att oenigheterna till stor del beror på att vi har olika grundsyn i moralfrågor – frågor som varken vetenskaperna eller politiken kan besvara. För detta syfte behövs etiken. Miljöetiken är den gren av etiken där de moraliska frågorna kring miljöproblemen studeras i detalj. Det är också vad som görs i denna bok.

  • 4.
    Torpman, Olle
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Philosophy.
    Recension av Folke Tersman, Tillsammans2009In: Tidskrift för politisk filosofi, ISSN 1402-2710, Vol. 13, no 2, p. 50-56Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 5.
    Torpman, Olle
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Philosophy.
    Recension av Torbjörn Tännsjö, Privatliv2012In: Tidskrift för politisk filosofi, ISSN 1402-2710, no 1, p. 45-58Article, book review (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 6.
    Torpman, Olle
    et al.
    Stockholm University, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Philosophy.
    Gustafsson, Johan
    In Defense of My Favourite Theory2014In: Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, ISSN 0279-0750, E-ISSN 1468-0114, Vol. 95, no 2, p. 159-174Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    One of the principles on how to act under moral uncertainty, My Favourite Theory, says roughly that a morally conscientious agent chooses an option that is permitted by the most credible moral theory. In defence of this principle, we argue that it prescribes consistent choices over time, without relying on intertheoretic comparisons of value, while its main rivals are either plagued by moral analogues of money pumps or in need of a method for making non-arbitrary intertheoretic comparisons. We rebut the arguments that have been levelled against My Favourite Theory and offer some arguments against intertheoretic comparisons of value.

1 - 6 of 6
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf