Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Rawls–Harsanyi Dispute: A Moral Point of View.Michael Moehler - 2018 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99 (1):82-99.
    Central to the Rawls–Harsanyi dispute is the question of whether the core modeling device of Rawls' theory of justice, the original position, justifies Rawls' principles of justice, as Rawls suggests, or whether it justifies the average utility principle, as Harsanyi suggests. Many commentators agree with Harsanyi and consider this dispute to be primarily about the correct application of normative decision theory to Rawls' original position. I argue that, if adequately conceived, the Rawls–Harsanyi dispute is not primarily a dispute about the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • The Aggregation Problem for Scanlonian Contractualism: An Exploration of the Relevance View, Mixed Solutions, and Why Scanlonian Contractualists Could Be, and Perhaps Should Be, Restricted Prioritarians.Aart Van Gils - 2019 - Dissertation, University of Reading
    In this thesis, I discuss the aggregation problem for T. M. Scanlon’s “contractualism”. I argue that Scanlonian contractualists have the following two options when it comes to the aggregation problem. First, they can choose to limit aggregation directly via a specific version of the Relevance View, “Sequential Claims-Matching”. Second, Scanlonian contractualists can adopt a so-called “mixed solution” of which I propose a specific version. My mixed solution does not limit aggregation. Rather, it either avoids some of the counterintuitive results in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • If You’Re a Rawlsian, How Come You’Re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness.Gabriele Badano - 2018 - Health Care Analysis 26 (1):1-16.
    Norman Daniels’s theory of ‘accountability for reasonableness’ is an influential conception of fairness in healthcare resource allocation. Although it is widely thought that this theory provides a consistent extension of John Rawls’s general conception of justice, this paper shows that accountability for reasonableness has important points of contact with both utilitarianism and intuitionism, the main targets of Rawls’s argument. My aim is to demonstrate that its overlap with utilitarianism and intuitionism leaves accountability for reasonableness open to damaging critiques. The important (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Loosely Relational Constitutional Rights.Tom Kohavi - forthcoming - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies.
    This article attends to claims that the expansionist trend in modern constitutional practices resulted in the recognition of many norms that are not real rights: they fail to guide and constrain duty-bearers and empower and protect right-holders because they are too abstract and can be limited too regularly. It claims that many constitutional rights are, indeed, ‘loosely relational’: the correlation between them and duties is flexible and affected by considerations external to the direct relations between the right-holder and the duty-bearer. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Ajatuksia esineellistymisen käsitteen rehabilitoimiseksi.Heikki Ikäheimo - 2016 - In Marko Ahteensuu (ed.), E pluribus unum - Scripta in honorem Eerik Lagerspetz sexagesimum annum complentis. pp. 47-59.
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Don’T Count on Taurek: Vindicating the Case for the Numbers Counting.Yishai Cohen - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (3):245-261.
    Suppose you can save only one of two groups of people from harm, with one person in one group, and five persons in the other group. Are you obligated to save the greater number? While common sense seems to say ‘yes’, the numbers skeptic says ‘no’. Numbers Skepticism has been partly motivated by the anti-consequentialist thought that the goods, harms and well-being of individual people do not aggregate in any morally significant way. However, even many non-consequentialists think that Numbers Skepticism (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Restricted Prioritarianism or Competing Claims?Benjamin Lange - 2017 - Utilitas 29 (2):137-152.
    I here settle a recent dispute between two rival theories in distributive ethics: Restricted Prioritarianism and the Competing Claims View. Both views mandate that the distribution of benefits and burdens between individuals should be justifiable to each affected party in a way that depends on the strength of each individual’s separately assessed claim to receive a benefit. However, they disagree about what elements constitute the strength of those individuals’ claims. According to restricted prioritarianism, the strength of a claim is determined (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • What Would Taurek Do?Tyler Doggett - manuscript
    A very short, exegetical paper about Taurek's "Should the Numbers Count?," arguing against the view that Taurek requires giving chances.
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Principles of Need and the Aggregation Thesis.Erik Gustavsson & Niklas Juth - 2019 - Health Care Analysis 27 (2):77-92.
    Principles of need are constantly referred to in health care priority setting. The common denominator for any principle of need is that it will ascribe some kind of special normative weight to people being worse off. However, this common ground does not answer the question how a plausible principle of need should relate to the aggregation of benefits across individuals. Principles of need are sometimes stated as being incompatible with aggregation and sometimes characterized as accepting aggregation in much the same (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • What Does Ivan Ilyich Need To Be Rescued From?Gerald Lang - 2014 - Philosophy 89 (2):1-23.
    Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilyich describes how a man's exposure to imminent death allows him to secure redemption from a flawed life. Through close textual attention to Tolstoy's novella and extensive engagement with Frances Kamm's treatment of it, this article quarrels with this of Ivan's case, offering a sourer, more pessimistic view. It is argued that Ivan's reconciliation to death is facilitated by a series of mistakes he makes en route to his dying moments. Two more general lessons are (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark