GOC VII Live: Cultural, Ethical, & Spiritual Issues
Following on the opening Plenary Session and keynote by David Orr who pointed out that progressive movements fail in part for not being radical enough Professor Concepcion made the argument that we are morally obligated to not reproduce. David Concepcion, Associate Professor of Philosophy Ball State University Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies Notes from his paper presentation "Philosophical Foundations: Am INowMorally Obligated to Not Reproduce" follow below:
The rate and magnitude of current population growth is unprecedented and unlike our ancestors we do not have the choice to not pay attention to population growth. Thus, we have a prima facie moral ethic to not create more people. His argument tied to Carbon reduction: The act of choosing not to create a human is the largest single act one can take to reduce their carbon footprint. The aim of the paper is to encourage the more personal question: am I morally obligated not to reproduce, knowing fully my own personal carbon footprint and need to reduce it. The other side to the argument- Reasonable gains to creating another human: parent child bond (but wait, you don?t have to create a new child to do that) Some things can only be reaped through giving birth but most of the benefits can be reaped through having one child or adopting. Do not confuse what is in one's own self interest and what is morally best-morality sometimes demands sacrifice. We have the right to reproduce under international United Nations Conventions. That right should not be limited, but the critical question must be raised to the moral obligations we have for the future of our planet. High consuming nations (especially) need to reduce their impact-one way- don't create a new human! What do people think? Anyone else out there struggle with the question to have a child or not based on ecological/environmental/social/economic concerns? Is this a radical solution that would never work? should we encourage people to not reproduce but adopt instead? Is this validly related to sustainability?
Browse by Topic
- aashe2011
- Buildings
- Podcast
- COP15-HE
- Climate
- Co-Curricular Education
- Community Engagement
- Curriculum
- Dining Services
- Diversity, Access, and Affordability
- Energy
- Faculty and Staff Development
- Financing
- Grounds
- Human Resources
- Purchasing
- Research
- Transportation
- Waste
- AASHE Biz
- Interviews
- Events
- Government & Legislation
- Videos
- aashe2008

I wasn't able to make it to
I wasn't able to make it to this conference but I wonder what people's feelings were after hearing Prof Concepcion's (ironic name) arguements. This is a debate my wife and I are currently having. She wants three kids and I want no more than two in order to stay at or below replacement level. Is zero the new two?