Ethics and risk. Toward a responsible approach to acceptable risk impositions

[摘要] ENGLISH SUMMARY: This research deals with the ethical evaluation of risk impositions, i.e. actions thatexpose other human beings to risk. When – under what circumstances or conditions – isit acceptable to perform an action that exposes others to risk? The research attends tothis question in three parts.The first part of the research explores the notion of risk and its relevance for normativephilosophy. The history of the term risk is discussed, as well as its relation to ethicalconcepts such as agency, knowledge, harm, safety, blame, trust, and responsibility.The second part of the research investigates how four branches of mainstream ethicaltheory – utilitarianism, deontology, rights-based ethics, and contractualism –individually evaluate risk impositions. These theories of right action bring to the foreseveral ethical considerations that influence the acceptability of risk impositions: thelikeliness and severity of harm; the likeliness and extent of benefit; the obligation not toharm without good reason; rights not to be harmed without good reason; compensationfor suffered harm; consent to risk exposure; distribution of risks and benefits;knowledge about consequences and victims; relations between cause and effect; andpower relations between risk-imposing agents and risk-bearers.A multitude of these considerations can determine the acceptability of a particular riskimposition, depending on the context in which the risk is imposed. Quality judgement isindispensable, for a risk-imposing agent must judge which considerations are mostimportant in the given situation, to what extent they matter, and whether they justify therisk imposition. An honest and adequate evaluation of risk impositions then has to takeall mentioned considerations into account, and be attentive to the motives, character,and judgement of agents. However, the traditional normative approaches fail to providesuch a holistic evaluation, as they tend to focus solely on several considerations, andlack attention to the context in which risks are imposed.The third and last part of the research therefore develops an alternative approach to theevaluation of risk impositions, which combines theories of action with theories ofvirtue. The proposed alternative interprets the notion of responsibility in virtue-ethical terms, i.e. as the virtue of answerability. It argues that the acceptability of riskimpositions is directly correlated to the extent to which a risk-imposing agent isanswerable for her actions. It argues that answerability has to be understoodconversationally, as a call-and-response process between risk-imposing agent and riskbearer.And it argues that a risk-imposing agent should aim to be answerable, and cantake responsibility, for her actions in three ways: by providing reasons for acting, byresponding in a practically adequate way to risked or actual harm, and by responding inan attitudinally appropriate way to risked or actual harm.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University