Hillerbrand Rafaela, Peterson Martin
Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX, Delft, The Netherlands,
Sci Eng Ethics. 2014 Jun;20(2):583-95. doi: 10.1007/s11948-013-9452-5. Epub 2013 May 24.
The debate over the civilian use of nuclear power is highly polarised. We argue that a reasonable response to this deep disagreement is to maintain that advocates of both camps should modify their positions. According to the analysis we propose, nuclear power is neither entirely right nor entirely wrong, but rather right and wrong to some degree. We are aware that this non-binary analysis of nuclear power is controversial from a theoretical point of view. Utilitarians, Kantians, and other moral theorists make sharp, binary distinctions between right and wrong acts. However, an important argument speaking in favour of our non-binary analysis is that it better reflects our considered intuitions about the ethical trade-offs we face in discussions of nuclear power. The aim of this article is to make this argument sharp by explaining how it can be rendered compatible with, and supported by, the Capability Approach, which is quickly becoming one of the most influential frameworks for thinking about human development.
关于核能民用的争论高度两极分化。我们认为,对于这种深刻分歧的一个合理回应是主张两个阵营的倡导者都应修改他们的立场。根据我们提出的分析,核能既不完全正确也不完全错误,而是在某种程度上既有正确的一面也有错误的一面。我们意识到,这种对核能的非二元分析从理论角度来看是有争议的。功利主义者、康德主义者和其他道德理论家在正确与错误行为之间做出了鲜明的二元区分。然而,一个支持我们非二元分析的重要论点是,它能更好地反映我们在核能讨论中面临的伦理权衡时经过深思熟虑的直觉。本文的目的是通过解释如何使其与能力方法兼容并得到其支持,从而使这一论点更加有力,能力方法正迅速成为思考人类发展最具影响力的框架之一。