Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||It has been known for quite a while now that the on-going project of constructing an acceptable population axiology has gloomy prospects. Already in Derek Parfit’s seminal contribution to the topic, an informal paradox was presented and later contributions have proved similar results.1 All of these contributions invoke, however, some version of a principle – the Mere Addition Principle – which is controversial.2 In Arrhenius (1998), I presented a theorem which didn’t invoke this controversial principle but replaced it with logically and intuitively weaker conditions. Still, however, one of the conditions in my theorem shares with these earlier results the presupposition that welfare can be measured on at least an interval scale.3 One can deny this and, as a matter of..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Christian List & Philip Pettit (2004). Aggregating Sets of Judgments: Two Impossibility Results Compared. Synthese 140 (1-2):207 - 235.
Philip Pettit (2004). Aggregating Sets of Judgments: Two Impossibility Results Compared. Synthese 140 (1/2):207 - 235.
Alfred F. Mackay (1973). A Simplified Proof of an Impossibility Theorem. Philosophy of Science 40 (2):175-177.
Gustaf Arrhenius (2000). An Impossibility Theorem for Welfarist Axiologies. Economics and Philosophy 16 (2):247-266.
Added to index2009-01-31
Total downloads53 ( #23,240 of 740,856 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,856 )
How can I increase my downloads?