Why should we stop contributing to collective harms if this is a waste of effort? For example, why change our lifestyles to combat climate change?
My claims:
Ø Instrumental analyses are insufficient. Either they don’t provide reasons to act, or they don’t explain why we should waste our efforts.
Ø Instead, we need two universalization steps to solve the problem (not usually distinguished).
Ø I relate my account to kindred ideas in Kant, Parfit, Rawls, and some others.
Ø Finally, Nefsky’s challenges (superfluity, disconnect) can be addressed.
Keywords: collective action, instrumental, non-instrumental, wasted effort, universalization
For The Ethics of Inefficacy (Routledge, 2026)
Hopefully you can make it for this important discussion.