How can we address global problems – such as catastrophic climate change – when individual actions make very little difference? What’s the right thing to do when there aren’t easy answers? Is it wrong to do nothing? Is everything relative, or are there better ways to think about solutions?
As Travis Rieder writes in Catastrophe Ethics, we need our own frameworks for making decisions. Two common pitfalls get in the way. One highlights universal rules and the other rejects them. To avoid being distracted by either, we need to think for ourselves about right and wrong, inspired by ideas drawn from moral philosophy.
Our conversation explores how this works to make life meaningful. In the process, we talk about illusions of purity, the need to find reasons to justify actions and the value of “doing our part” – however limited it may be – to minimise harm. We also reflect on life’s inevitable compromises, the complicated ethics of creating new people, and why personal integrity means being transparent not wearing a hair-shirt.
Travis works as a professor at the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. He’s also the author of In Pain: A Bioethicist’s Personal Struggle with Opioids, which expands on a TED talk about his experience.
Listen to this episode with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Ancient Futures to listen to this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.
