-
649Constitutional Experiments: Representing Future Generations Through Submajority RulesJournal of Political Philosophy 17 (4): 440-461. 2009.No Abstract
-
485Rettslig moralisme og retten til ytringsfrihetNorsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 52 (3): 114-129. 2017.
-
410Electoral Design, Sub-Majority Rules, and Representation for Future GenerationsIn Inigo Gonzalez-Ricoy & Axel Gosseries (eds.), Institutions for Future Generations, Oxford University Press. pp. 214-227. 2016.
-
385The Political Rights of Anti-Liberal-Democratic GroupsLaw and Philosophy 31 (3): 269-297. 2012.The purpose of this paper is to consider whether it is permissible for a liberal democratic state to deny anti-liberal-democratic citizens and groups the right to run for parliament. My answer to this question is twofold. On the one hand, I will argue that it is, in principle, permissible for liberal democratic states to deny anti-liberal-democratic citizens and groups the right to run for parliament. On the other hand, I will argue that it is rarely wise (or prudent) for ripe democracies to exc…Read more
-
312Democratic legitimacy, political speech and viewpoint neutralityPhilosophy and Social Criticism 47 (6): 723-752. 2021.The purpose of this article is to consider the question of whether democratic legitimacy requires viewpoint neutrality with regard to political speech – including extremist political speech, such as hate speech. The starting point of my discussion is Jeremy Waldron’s negative answer to this question. He argues that it is permissible for liberal democracies to ban certain extremist viewpoints – such as vituperative hate speech – because such viewpoint-based restrictions protect the dignity of per…Read more
-
191Politisk uvitenhet, stemmeretten og velgeres moralske ansvarNorsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 54 (3): 151-166. 2019.
-
181Toleration, Respect for Persons, and the Free Speech Right to do Moral WrongIn Mitja Sardoč (ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Toleration, Palgrave-macmillan. pp. 149-172. 2020.The purpose of this chapter is to consider the question of whether respect for persons requires toleration of the expression of any extremist political or religious viewpoint within public discourse. The starting point of my discussion is Steven Heyman and Jonathan Quong’s interesting defences of a negative answer to this question. They argue that respect for persons requires that liberal democracies should not tolerate the public expression of extremist speech that can be regarded as recognitio…Read more
-
137Environmental Risks, Uncertainty and Intergenerational EthicsEnvironmental Values 13 (4): 421-448. 2004.The way our decisions and actions can affect future generations is surrounded by uncertainty. This is evident in current discussions of environmental risks related to global climate change, biotechnology and the use and storage of nuclear energy. The aim of this paper is to consider more closely how uncertainty affects our moral responsibility to future generations, and to what extent moral agents can be held responsible for activities that inflict risks on future people. It is argued that our m…Read more
-
112Respekt for personer, epistemiske plikter og klanderverdig politisk uvitenhetNorsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 55 (2-3): 199-213. 2020.
-
100Green Constitutionalism: The Constitutional Protection of Future GenerationsRatio Juris 20 (3): 378-401. 2007.The purpose of this paper is to propose and consider a new constitutional provision that can contribute to the protection of the vital needs of future generations. The proposal I wish to elaborate can be termed the posterity provision, and it has both substantive and procedural elements. The aim of this constitutional provision is twofold. The first is to encourage state authorities to make more future‐oriented deliberations and decisions. The second is to create more public awareness and improv…Read more
-
99Giving a voice to posterity – deliberative democracy and representation of future peopleJournal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (5): 429-450. 2005.The aim of this paper is to consider whether some seats in a democratically elected legislative assembly ought to be reserved for representatives of future generations. In order to examine this question, I will propose a new democratic model for representing posterity. It is argued that this model has several advantages compared with a model for the democratic representation of future people previously suggested by Andrew Dobson. Nevertheless, the democratic model that I propose confronts at lea…Read more
-
88The principle of liberty and legal representation of posterityRes Publica 12 (4): 385-409. 2006.This paper considers a guardianship model for the legal representation of future generations. According to this model, national and international courts should be given the competence to appoint guardians for future generations, if agents who care about the welfare of posterity apply for the creation of a guardianship in relation to a dispute that can be resolved by the application of law. This reform would grant guardians of future people legal standing or locus standi before courts, that is, t…Read more
-
58How difficult should it be to amend constitutional laws?Scandinavian Studies in Law 52 79-101. 2007.The purpose of this paper is to consider some aspects of the question of how difficult it should be to amend or change constitutional laws through formal amendment procedures. The point of departure of my discussion is an amendment procedure that has recently been suggested by the prominent legal and political philosopher Bruce Ackerman. He defends a three-step amendment procedure – where a re-elected president is authorised to propose amendments that must thereafter be approved first by a two-t…Read more
-
54Liberalism and Permissible Suppression of Illiberal IdeasInquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 55 (2): 171-193. 2012.The purpose of this paper is to consider the following question: To what extent is it permissible for a liberal democratic state to suppress the spread of illiberal ideas (including anti-democratic ideas)? I will discuss two approaches to this question. The first can be termed the clear and imminent danger approach, and the second the preventive approach. The clear and imminent danger approach implies that it is permissible for liberal states to suppress the spread of illiberal doctrines and ide…Read more
-
46Reconsidering Approaches to Moral StatusEthics, Policy and Environment 14 (3). 2011.Ethics, Policy & Environment, Volume 14, Issue 3, Page 361-375, October 2011
-
12Risiko, usikkerhet og intergenerasjonell etikkNorsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 37 (4): 241-260. 2002.
Kristian Skagen Ekeli
University Of Stavanger
-
University Of StavangerProfessor
Areas of Specialization
Applied Ethics |
Philosophy of Law |
Social and Political Philosophy |
Areas of Interest
Applied Ethics |
Normative Ethics |
Philosophy of Law |
Social and Political Philosophy |