Disputas Kristoffer Mällberg

Avhandlingen er tilgengelig i Nasjonalt vitenarkiv.

The doctoral Thesis are available in Nasjonalt vitenarkiv.

Prøveforelesning over oppgitt emne holdes kl. 10.15 på SVHUM B1005

"Recent contributions to the climate justice debate."

Prøveforelesningen vil bli strømmet/The trial lecture will also be streamed here.

Disputasen starter kl. 12.15, samme sted og vil bli strømmet her.

Opptak av disputasen vil være tilgjengelig i en måned.

A recording of the disputastion will be avaiable for one month.

Populærvitenskapelig sammendrag av avhandlingen:

The changes brought about by global climate change as well as the measures taken to combat climate change will have a tremendous impact over the coming decades. The decisions we reach will influence the way we produce power, how we produce food, how we produce goods, how we travel, and how we live. This thesis attempts to examine the interaction between political philosophy and the political discussions on combating global climate change. In the tradition of applied philosophy I attempt to bring the philosophical theories into contact with the actual conditions of global climate change. Article 1 deals with the relationship between political philosophers and politics. I argue that the circumstances of global climate change means that political engagement on this issue will not violate a professional duty. Article 2 argues that if philosophical theory seeks to impact the current political debates then the constraints that affect the political discussions must be addressed. I argue that these constraints prohibit normative contribution to the political discussions and that political philosophy should rather try to influence the form of the political discussions and implement a minimal justificatory version of public reason due to our concern for future generations. Article 3 argue implementing the requirements of public reason is problematic for minority groups and indigenous peoples, and examines how to include these groups in political discussions. I argue that cultural reasons are comparable to religious reasons in that they are unacceptable in the public political forum, and that Habermas’ Institutional Translation Provisio should apply also to cultural reasons. I criticize what I see as a main weakness with attempts to implement the ITP, and argue that this weak point can be avoided by institutionalizing and formalizing the duty to collaborate and transferring it to an independent agency.

Veiledere:

Førsteamanuensis Øyvind Stokke, UiT Norges arktiske universitet

Professor ph.d. Robert Huseby, Universitetet i Oslo

Bedømmelseskomité:

Professor ph.d. Fabian Schuppert, University of Potsdam. 1.opponent

Universitetslektor ph.d. Alexa Zellentin, University College Dublin. 2. opponent

Førsteamanuensis ph.d. Ivar Russøy Labukt, UiT Norges arktiske universitet Leder av komité

Disputasleder:

Instituttleder Melina Duarte, Institutt for filosofi og førstesemesterstudier

De som ønsker å opponere ex auditorio kan sende e-post til leder av disputas melina.duarte@uit.no innen kl. 14.00 disputasdagen.