Per Ariansen: Beyond Parfit’s Paradox Printed in Ariansen, Per. 1998. “Beyond Parfit’s Paradox”. In Future Generations and International Law, edited by E. A. e. al. London: Earthscan Publications. There are a number of problems connected with the question of our obligation to future generations: Can one at all have obligations towards the unborn and unconceived? What becomes of our obligations in view of the fact that we have limited knowledge of the preferences and technological abilities of future generations etc.? Quite possibly all these questions are overshadowed by a stunning and near paradoxical conclusion embedded in an argument offered by Derek Parfit (Parfit 1984), (Parfit 1982).The argument seemingly relieves the present generation of (almost) all responsibility for future generations. Even if we did (and we quite possibly do) conduct an environmental policy with strongly detrimental effects for posterity, the people of the future, according to the argument, will not want us to have acted differently. Therefore they cannot be said to be victims of our policies, and with no victims we are ethically free to neglect (almost) 1 all of the interests of future people. The central premise of the argument is that policies implemented in the present situation not only have certain effects on future generations, affecting their welfare for better or for worse, but they will also determine which persons will be born. Large scale policies to a large extent determine also which persons will be born. For example, those of us born after World War II would most likely not have been born had it not been for the war. The war situation almost certainly played a part in determining which persons came to have children together, and also at which precise moment conception took place. An alternative set of parents, or even a different set of gametes from the same parents, will result in a different person being born - at best someone in the position of a sibling to someone who actually was born. Let us imagine, moreover, that our generation has a choice between two quite different large scale 2 environmental policies, one of extensive saving and one of limitless harvesting and exploitation of global resources. The two policies will of course have consequences for the welfare of coming generations. Limitless harvesting will raise the standard of welfare for the present and immediate generations, but will significantly lower the welfare of the coming 1 The paradox - or the so called Non-Identity problem - does not apply to actions in the present which have no relevance to the question of whom will be born in the future. 2 The emphasis is on large scale, as a single act of omission in the present may well suppress its effects altogether until they are suddenly released in the future . In these cases the act has no influence on who will be born in the future (see footnote no. 2). Parfit cites carelessness in burying nuclear waste .