Zagonari, Fabio
(2019)
Only religious ethics can help achieve global environmental sustainability.
[Preprint]
Full text available as:
Abstract
This paper develops a theoretical framework for comparing religious ethics (from Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam) and secular ethics (based on duties vs. rights, current vs. future generations, humans vs. non-humans, intra- vs. inter-generational equity, teleological vs. deontological perspectives, anthropocentrism vs. biocentrism, cooperative vs. bargaining solutions, weak vs. strong sustainability, optimistic vs. current scenarios). I focused on the duties to nature (β) and future generations (γ), rights of future generations (δ), and aversion to intra- and inter-generational inequality (ε and ζ, respectively). To perform this analysis, I adopt an individual perspective to favor comparisons between religious and secular ethics. I also consider future scenarios for consumption preferences (α), population size (η), and improved technology (θ). I present empirical results for OECD and non-OECD countries, based on numerical simulations for current and maximum feasible parameter values and on statistical analyses for marginal reliable changes of parameters, within a single graphical framework. α, η, and θ are unessential for sustainability; β is beneficial but not feasible and unreliable in OECD countries; γ is detrimental in all countries; δ is beneficial, feasible and reliable in OECD countries, but inadequate; ε is detrimental and ζ is essential in all countries. The religious ethics were adequate, feasible and reliable for Hinduism or Buddhism, Islam, and Judaism.
Abstract
This paper develops a theoretical framework for comparing religious ethics (from Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam) and secular ethics (based on duties vs. rights, current vs. future generations, humans vs. non-humans, intra- vs. inter-generational equity, teleological vs. deontological perspectives, anthropocentrism vs. biocentrism, cooperative vs. bargaining solutions, weak vs. strong sustainability, optimistic vs. current scenarios). I focused on the duties to nature (β) and future generations (γ), rights of future generations (δ), and aversion to intra- and inter-generational inequality (ε and ζ, respectively). To perform this analysis, I adopt an individual perspective to favor comparisons between religious and secular ethics. I also consider future scenarios for consumption preferences (α), population size (η), and improved technology (θ). I present empirical results for OECD and non-OECD countries, based on numerical simulations for current and maximum feasible parameter values and on statistical analyses for marginal reliable changes of parameters, within a single graphical framework. α, η, and θ are unessential for sustainability; β is beneficial but not feasible and unreliable in OECD countries; γ is detrimental in all countries; δ is beneficial, feasible and reliable in OECD countries, but inadequate; ε is detrimental and ζ is essential in all countries. The religious ethics were adequate, feasible and reliable for Hinduism or Buddhism, Islam, and Judaism.
Document type
Preprint
Creators
Subjects
DOI
Deposit date
28 Aug 2019 07:50
Last modified
28 Aug 2019 07:50
URI
Other metadata
Document type
Preprint
Creators
Subjects
DOI
Deposit date
28 Aug 2019 07:50
Last modified
28 Aug 2019 07:50
URI
Downloads
Downloads
Staff only: