Ken Binmore’s Natural Justice

Analyse & Kritik 28 (1):99-101 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I raise a few questions about key points in the argument of Natural Jus- tice. 1. The pivotal role assigned to the theory of indefinitely repeated games appears to be both implausible and unnecessary. 2. The evolutionary foundations of the Nash bargaining solution are not completely secure, and its role in the account of interper- sonal comparisones of utility is questionable. 3. Free renegotiation behind the veil of ignorance appears neither to have an evolutionary rationale nor to be a brute fact about the way men are

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,466

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Psychology of Justice.Fiery Cushman, Liane Young & Marc Hauser - 2006 - Analyse & Kritik 28 (1):95-98.
Binmore's Egalitarianism.Christoph Schmidt-Petri - 2006 - Analyse & Kritik 27 (1):89-94.
Binmore’s Humeanism.Dieter Birnbacher - 2006 - Analyse & Kritik 28 (1):66-70.
Behavioral Ethics Meets Natural Justice.Herbert Gintis - 2006 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 5 (1):5-32.
Justice: Political Not Natural.Fabienne Peter - 2006 - Analyse & Kritik 28 (1):83-88.
Natural Justice: Response to Comments.Ken Binmore - 2006 - Analyse & Kritik 28 (1):111-117.
Reciprocity and the Social Contract.Ken Binmore - 2004 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (1):5-35.
On Kenneth Binmore's Natural Justice.Douglass C. North - 2006 - Analyse & Kritik 28 (1):102-3.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-27

Downloads
29 (#399,460)

6 months
1 (#417,143)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brian Skyrms
University of California, Irvine

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references