Species' wellbeing, counterfactual comparative harm, and the non-identity problem
Portada No. 114, 2024
PDF

Keywords

Non-Identity Problem
Counterfactual Comparative Account of Harm
Species’ Wellbeing
Biotic Welfare
Species

How to Cite

Atkins, J. S. (2024). Species’ wellbeing, counterfactual comparative harm, and the non-identity problem. Diálogos, 55(114), 117–145. Retrieved from https://revistas.upr.edu/index.php/dialogos/article/view/21260

Abstract

The non-identity problem raises problems for many versions of the counterfactual comparative account of harm. If an individual’s existence depends on climate change, then we cannot say that climate change makes this individual worse off than they would be otherwise, since otherwise they would not exist. However, I argue in this paper that consideration for species’ wellbeing avoids the non-identity problem: the species can be worse off than it would have been otherwise because the species existence does not depend on climate change. I first examine a number of views of counterfactual comparative harm and argue that they are subject to the non-identity problem. Then I survey a number of views of species, showing that they are consistent with my argument. I, then, offer a novel account species’ wellbeing and species’ harm. Species harm and wellbeing is the aggregate projected aggregate welfare of all of the individual members over time. I then argue that this account of species’ wellbeing avoids the non-identity problem. In the last section, I answer objections.

PDF
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.