Persuading people to worry about the long term is harder than you think

Not all of us feel that we owe a great deal to distant generations.

Not all of us feel that we owe a great deal to distant generations. PHOTO: AFP
New: Gift this subscriber-only story to your friends and family

(FINANCIAL TIMES) - If I scatter broken glass on the ground and someone else walks over it and cuts their feet, does it matter "when" they cut their feet? That's the thought experiment at the start of the philosopher William MacAskill's forthcoming book, What We Owe The Future.

Mr MacAskill's argument is that harm is harm, whether my littering causes cut feet later today, next week or in 10,000 years. He believes that we should consider harm to future people as equal in severity to that inflicted upon the living. And because the potential number of future people is far greater than those who are currently alive, this should change how we think about problems and risks in the present day.

Already a subscriber? 

Read the full story and more at $9.90/month

Get exclusive reports and insights with more than 500 subscriber-only articles every month

Unlock these benefits

  • All subscriber-only content on ST app and straitstimes.com

  • Easy access any time via ST app on 1 mobile device

  • E-paper with 2-week archive so you won't miss out on content that matters to you

Find out more about climate change and how it could affect you on the ST microsite here.