Consensus and responsability as solidarity - How does discursive ethics overcome its critiques?

摘要

If one follows Jonas’ argument, all moral theory that entails as premise the existence of a human community fails because the conditions for the persistence of life in the future can no longer be subject to anticipation. In this context, it is pressing that ethical theories make up an account for a form of responsibility that would answer this challenge. Are we left with nothing but a simple return to a metaphysical standpoint where all forms of life have an intrinsic value sufficient to insure their persistence? How does discursive ethics respond to this test? How does an ethical theory for which the normative output is based on a consensus among communicative agents and for which there is no direct obligation towards non-communicative beings insert a responsibility for the future generations and the future of nature?