What Do We Owe The Future?

Sonofason

JulesKorngold said:

As individuals and as a society, we owe the future a number of things. One of the most important is to ensure that the world we leave behind for future generations is a healthy and sustainable one. This means taking action to address environmental challenges such as climate change, preserving biodiversity, and protecting natural resources.

We also owe the future the opportunity to thrive and pursue their own goals and dreams. This means providing access to education, healthcare, and other basic necessities, as well as promoting equality and social justice.

Another important responsibility we have to the future is to ensure that we are passing on a legacy of knowledge, culture, and values that will help future generations understand the world and make informed decisions. This includes preserving history and cultural heritage, as well as promoting scientific and artistic inquiry and innovation.

Ultimately, what we owe the future is to do our best to create a better world for them, one that is more just, more equitable, and more sustainable than the one we inherited.

I have no obligation to future generations to leave them a healthy and sustainable world.  I am under no obligation to address environmental challenges.  You cannot prevent the climate from changing, and I have no intention to try to do so.  I have no obligation to preserve biodiversity, nor to protect natural resources.

My ancestors did not try to leave me a better world, and I have no intention to attempt leaving future generations a better world.

Indeed, how exactly did I acquire such an obligation.  Well.  I didn't...and therefore I don't have one.

anarchist100

how exactly did I acquire such an obligation.

You reproduced.

It is immoral to bring people into existence if they won't have any quality of life.

MayCaesar

You have made a lot of claims, but you have not really justified them. You only said that we (who is "we", by the way?) owe the future generation this, this and that, but did not at all elaborate on the source of this alleged obligation.

As far as I am concerned, there are only two types of obligations one can have before anyone else: rights-based and consent-based. Rights-based obligations are those that prevent you from employing coercion against others: you have an obligation to not murder anyone, for instance. Consent-based obligations are those that have resulted from a mutual voluntary agreement on something, often backed up by a contract: if you took a loan from a bank, then you have an obligation to repay that loan as per terms of the contract.
Needless to say, "owing the future generations" does not fall under either category and is an incoherent concept in this categorization.

If the moment I die the planet gets smoked into oblivion, then that is unfortunate and, perhaps, questionable from the ethical perspective in case I played a part in making that happen - but I will not have failed to pay some sort of debt to someone. There can be no debt to someone separated from you by time. You cannot owe something to George Washington, and you cannot owe something to Joe Black from 2200. Entities currently not alive cannot be owed anything, nor can they owe anyone anything.

anarchist100 said:

It is immoral to bring people into existence if they won't have any quality of life.

Quality of life is relative. According to the modern standards, virtually everyone born before 1900 lived in unacceptable poverty. Does this mean that every single woman who has given birth prior to 1900 committed an immoral act?

This seems to be incoherent to me: since every single person who has ever lived is a product of a chain of such immoral acts, everyone's existence is fundamentally immoral, hence the concept of moral existence loses any meaning.

If this planet gets busted and becomes extremely unhospitable to humans, humans will adapt, standards will change, and what is considered an acceptable quality of life will change as well. You cannot judge the morality of actions of either future or past generations by the standards of the modern world.

John_C_87

@MayCaesar
You have made a lot of claims, but you have not really justified them. You only said that we (who is "we", by the way?) owe the future generation this, this and that, but did not at all elaborate on the source of this alleged obligation.

'We the people OF THE UNITED STATES, in order to frm the more perfect union hereby establish...

John_C_87

@Sonofason
I have no obligation to future generations to leave them a healthy and sustainable world.  I am under no obligation to address environmental challenges.  You cannot prevent the climate from changing, and I have no intention to try to do so.  I have no obligation to preserve biodiversity, nor to protect natural resources.

Yes, you did by fact have an obligation created by the United States Constitution Preamble like every other person who had been one of We the people of the United States from to Executive Office to the House of Representatives, from every woman to all men created equal by their creator which in this condition can be their demise.

How does our demise become our creator you may ask? It becomes our creator when it is the focus of a United State. Hence the fact stated in writing by American Constitutional preamble, we the people of the United States of America. Isn't the question to be asked however about maintainining the ballance between truth and whole truth? Can we stop the worlds climate from changing in a common defense twards the gedneral welfare, this means can the people giving direction establish we can stop the world from burning in the sun as it grows larger? Thye cannot.

Before you get in a twist however the United States Constitutional argument is not over Climate Change it is over Climate Manipulation, only one of these two choices is the best connection to established justice. Any American United States Constitutional Right is a connection to whole truth as it must somehow describe a human ability to shape their environment to provide posterity, liberty, and a pursuit of happiness for those who hold the united state. There is a rule to the method of Constitutional right, and it is a test of the best connection to a series of truths. Not one idea of truth.