Homework on Sabine Hohl and Dominic Roser, "Stepping in for the polluters"


All answers must be in your own words. When the authors say "pro tanto reason" they mean basically what we mean by "prima facie duty."


1. Here's an argument: once we figure out what our fair share of emissions would be if everyone complied, we have figured out what our duties are (they are to emit no more than our fair share). So we cannot have a duty to do more than our fair share, even if others do not comply.
The authors reject this argument. Explain why (this is in section 2). (2pts)

2. Explain the relative disadvantage interpretation of the fairness of objection in your own words. How do the authors respond to this objection? (2pts)

3. How do the authors respond to the extra burden interpretation of the fairness objection? (2pts)

4. The authors address the worry that taking up the slack will not prevent climate change. Explain their response to this worry. (2pts)

5. In your opinion, would the United States be obligated to do more than its fair share of reducing greenhouse emissions if other nations did not do their fair share? Why or why not? (2pts)