Graduate studies at Western
Politics, Philosophy and Economics 2 (3):342-381 (2003)
|Abstract||This article examines several families of population principles in the light of a set of axioms. In addition to the critical-level utilitarian, number-sensitive critical-level utilitarian, and number-dampened utilitarian families and their generalized counterparts, we consider the restricted number-dampened family and introduce two new ones: the restricted critical-level and restricted number-dependent critical-level families. Subsets of the restricted families have non-negative critical levels, avoid the `repugnant conclusion' and satisfy the axiom priority for lives worth living, but violate an important independence condition|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Roberta L. Millstein (2006). Natural Selection as a Population-Level Causal Process. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (4):627-653.
Stuart Rachels (2004). Repugnance or Intransitivity: A Repugnant but Forced Choice. In The Repugnant Conclusion: Essays on Population Ethics.
Jesper Ryberg, The Repugnant Conclusion. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Michael Huemer (2008). In Defence of Repugnance. Mind 117 (468):899-933.
Ashley Piggins (2007). Population Issues in Social Choice Theory, Welfare Economics, and Ethics, by Charles Blackorby, Walter Bossert, and David Donaldson. Cambridge University Press, 2005, VIII+369 Pages. [REVIEW] Economics and Philosophy 23 (2):256-260.
Charles Blackorby, Walter Bossert & David Donaldson (1997). Critical-Level Utilitarianism and the Population-Ethics Dilemma. Economics and Philosophy 13 (2):197-.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #86,080 of 739,174 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,174 )
How can I increase my downloads?