Defending transitivity against zeno’s paradox

Philosophy and Public Affairs 31 (3):272–279 (2003)
Abstract
This article criticises one of Stuart Rachels' and Larry Temkin's arguments against the transitivity of 'better than'. This argument invokes our intuitions about our preferences of different bundles of pleasurable or painful experiences of varying intensity and duration, which, it is argued, will typically be intransitive. This article defends the transitivity of 'better than' by showing that Rachels and Temkin are mistaken to suppose that preferences satisfying their assumptions must be intransitive. It makes cler where the argument goes wrong by showing that it is a version of Zeno's paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise.
Keywords Transitivity  Decision Theory  Zeno's Paradox
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,085
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA
Caspar Hare (2008). A Puzzle About Other-Directed Time-Bias. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (2):269 – 277.
Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

34 ( #51,049 of 1,101,622 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

12 ( #15,341 of 1,101,622 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.