Allocating Asylum

Here's an interesting moral controversy (which my brother brought to my attention).  Suppose that:(1) There are more English-speaking refugees seeking asylum than there are available
Philosophy News image
Here's an interesting moral controversy (which my brother brought to my attention).  Suppose that:(1) There are more English-speaking refugees seeking asylum than there are available "positions" for refugees in your country (let's call it "NZ") given current policy.(2) Migrants (including refugees) who speak English are more easily integrated into NZ than those who don't already speak the language. Thus, a greater number of English-speaking refugees (only) could be accepted into the country at no greater cost or institutional strain relative to current policy.We clearly have very strong moral reasons to want to be able to help as many refugees as possible.  Probably, current policy is unconscionable and we should be letting in anyone who is in a genuine state of desperate need. But given that this ideal is not going to happen, should we think it at least an improvement upon the status quo to introduce a policy of letting in a greater number of refugees all of whom are. . .

Continue reading . . .

News source: Philosophy, et cetera

blog comments powered by Disqus