He lives with his wife and daughter on an isolated parcel of land in Bonners Ferry, Idaho. He does his job as a logger efficiently and quietly, working in companionable silence with most of his co-workers. He doesn't get drunk; he isn't in debt; he doesn't get involved in situations that don't immediately seem to pertain to him. In other words, he minds his own business.
This argument is problematic given the current threat climate change poses for our lives, for it could lead to apathy and defeatism about the climate crisis. It raises the problem of collective impact, which concerns how the aggregation of individually inconsequential actions can produce a morally bad outcome overall. First, I shall formally set out the argument against us having a moral reason to reduce our individual emissions.
It's easier for humans to be dishonest if they delegate their actions to a machine agent like ChatGPT, according to a new scientific study recently published in the journal Nature. Artificial intelligence (AI) acts as a kind of psychological cushion that reduces the sense of moral responsibility. People find it harder to lie or do something irresponsible if they have to take the lead. AI, and its willingness to comply with any request from its users, can lead to a wave of cheating.
Billionaires are often lauded in America, but some condemn them as evil simply for being billionaires. This raises the moral issue of whether a person can be morally good and a billionaire. The issue is whether, in general, you could be a billionaire and still plausibly be a good person. Proper resolution of this issue requires determining which moral theory (if any) is correct. But we can rely to some degree on our moral intuitions and some basic logic.
Kant's account of evil makes three key claims with major consequences for moral agency and responsibility. First, the distinction between good and evil lies in the will (R 6:59). Unlike prior theories that locate evil in natural inclinations or external circumstances, Kant situates evil in the will's choice of maxims. This reveals that earlier theories misidentify both evil's source and its effect on agency, leading to misguided remedies (R 6:59).
"We start walking up to the Capitol, and we get the news that Pence betrayed us. He had way more power, and he wasn't willing to exercise it. And when Pence betrayed us is when we decided to storm the Capitol. (...) We just pushed and pushed and pushed and pushed, and yelled 'Go!' and yelled 'Charge!' And on and on and on, we just pushed and pushed and pushed-and we got in." (Jenny Cudd, recorded live video)