Comments on: More Fun with Collective Action

By: Doji12

Doji12 — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:50:34 +0000

I really enjoyed the post and i like to share this info with info with my friends that it could be discussed further thanks for sharing the post.
Regards,
Doji - emergency dentistry

By: Doji12

Doji12 — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 04:50:34 +0000

I really enjoyed the post and i like to share this info with info with my friends that it could be discussed further thanks for sharing the post.
Regards,
Doji - emergency dentistry

By: Hampers

Hampers — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:04:50 +0000

The first logic makes me laugh. A silly “alibi”, a shallow reason…very obvious that you were not really in the mood to attend. Why reason the toxic emission of the plane? LOL…Whether you attend or not, the plane will “fly” -still the toxic is release and you and all of us – will inhale the deadly fumes. Next time, bring with you fabulous food hampers as present. Nice isn't it?

By: Flights to Australia

Flights to Australia — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:34:15 +0000

Will, your answer is really interesting and amusing! Don't you find it tedious job to answer to those question which relates to some extent moral or ethics?

By: Amateur Moral Theory - Proposition 2 Edition « A Banner Coward

Amateur Moral Theory - Proposition 2 Edition « A Banner Coward — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:15:26 +0000

[...] the plane ride would dump more carbon into the atmosphere and thus contribute to global warming. In that case, relax. The plane will fly regardless of whether you’re on it, the carbon footprint of the flight is [...]

By: luispedro

luispedro — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 02:36:06 +0000

I thought that you, as a libertarian, would tend towards a Kantian “do as you believe everyone should do in your situation” in which case, the number of flights would certainly decrease.

By: luispedro

luispedro — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 02:36:00 +0000

I thought that you, as a libertarian, would tend towards a Kantian “do as you believe everyone should do in your situation” in which case, the number of flights would certainly decrease.

By: Carl Shulman

Carl Shulman — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:59:01 +0000

Will,

The factual premise, that if you don’t affect whether the plane flies then you don’t affect emissions, is wrong. Your mass and the mass of your luggage force the plane to expend more fuel to accelerate, decelerate, and to maintain cruising speed on a given route.

By: Carl Shulman

Carl Shulman — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:59:00 +0000

Will,

By: conchis

conchis — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:11:15 +0000

“I question the opinion of anyone who thinks 2 x 1.3 = 4″

Which would be no-one. You get to 4-ish assuming 1.5 tanks per leg (which would be conservative, cos it’s probably closer to 2). Next time try reading before mouthing off.

By: conchis

conchis — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:11:00 +0000

“I question the opinion of anyone who thinks 2 x 1.3 = 4″

Which would be no-one. You get to 4-ish assuming 1.5 tanks per leg (which would be conservative, cos it’s probably closer to 2). Next time try reading before mouthing off.

By: Julian Sanchez

Julian Sanchez — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 21:48:21 +0000

Will-
I think you’re off on two claims here. First, the chicken case is pretty parallel: My private abstention has no perceptible effect on the aggregate demand for chicken, but the abstention of many people concerned about animal suffering might.

Second, I think you’re reading Parfit sort of backwards here: He explicitly wants to argue that each “torturer” acts wrongly even if we think the notion of “imperceptible pain” is a sort of nonsense, and even stipulating that an individual torturer causes nobody any pain at all. Bottom of page 80, if you’re following along at home.

By: Julian Sanchez

Julian Sanchez — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 21:48:00 +0000

By: ck

ck — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 05:12:21 +0000

Also people who are interested in an extremely thorough treatment of the problem exemplified in Will's post above can read Moral Demands in Non-Ideal Theory by Liam Murphy.

By: ck

ck — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 05:12:00 +0000

Also people who are interested in an extremely thorough treatment of the problem exemplified in Will's post above can read Moral Demands in Non-Ideal Theory by Liam Murphy.