A Critique of Arguments Against Taking Future Generations Into Account

A Critique of Arguments Against Taking Future Generations Into Account In doing the readings for this week, I noniced that there were fewarguments in favor of ignoring restore for coming(prenominal) generations. A largepercentage of the authors seemed to feel that it is our moral province to at least replete the well being of future generations into government note in our decision-making (Note these authors also provided us withpowerful arguments as to why we corroborate a moral obligation to futuregenerations). In trying to go into out why there were so few arguments onthe an different(prenominal) side of the issue, I realized that there simply arnt many slipwayto argue against our moral responsibility to future peoples. I would liketo shortly address the weaknesses in arguments which suggest that weshould not factor the well-being of future generations into ourdecision-making. I would then like to address the issue of whetherproviding for future peoples give result in pr oblems for the presentgeneration. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I provide discuss aweakness which I launch in only of the articles, which is in talking somuch about future concerns,it sack be easy to lose track of the immediacyof environmental concerns for generations who ar already alive.The only real arguments which we read against concern for futurepeoples were found in the Heilbroner article. Heilbroner quotes twodifferent economists, both(prenominal) of whom seem to raise the identical question whyshould I care how long the human species lives? iodine of the economistsstates that we cant necessarily say that generations who are yet unbornare any better off if they are born than if they are not (quoted in Pojman277). The... ..., I critiqued the two economistsquoted in Heilborns article. To return to them for a minute, both menseemed to miss the point which I just mentioned -- the environmentalcrisis is not simply a matter of whether or not humans survive. Instea d,it is a matter of how we are able to live over the next equalise ofcenturies (and possibly beyond). Will the world continue to be plagued by rebellion cancer rates? Will the air be adequate to suspire withoutdeveloping illness or asthma? Will our children have forests to toy in?The answer to these questions lies clearly in our hands and in ourwillingness to take responsibility for the consequences of our actions.Regardless of whether the consequences will occur in twenty minutes, triaddays or a year, we must be willing to typeface up to reality instead of alwaysturning to look the other way.