My preference is to live a simple lifestyle, minimizing my carbon footprint, buying and consuming less, checking out books from a library instead of purchasing them, biking to work instead of driving, eating vegetarian, etc. Yet it's clear that if everyone lived in such a minimalistic manner, the global economy would be in a shambles. Am I somehow obligated to live a life of conspicuous consumption in order to help support and maintain economic stability and progress even at the cost of continued environmental destruction?

I think it might be argued that the present sort of economy would certainly come to an end if everyone started to consume a lot less, but that this might lead to the creation of a new sort of economy which could produce a happier, healthier and more relaxed community. Poorer perhaps in terms of GNP but not otherwise.

Read another response by Oliver Leaman
Read another response about Justice