What Is Wrong With Kamm's and Scanlon's Arguments Against Taurek

Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 3 (3):1-16 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I distinguish several arguments Kamm and Scanlon make against Taurek's claim that it is permissible to save smaller groups of people rather than larger. I then argue that none succeeds. This is a companion to my "Saving the Few."

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

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

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-12

Downloads
141 (#129,440)

6 months
16 (#150,393)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tyler Doggett
University of Vermont

Citations of this work

The Many, the Few, and the Nature of Value.Daniel Muñoz - 2022 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 9 (4):70-87.
Saving the Few.Tyler Doggett - 2011 - Noûs 47 (2):302-315.
Contractualism.Jussi Suikkanen - 2020 - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

What we owe to each other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 2002 - Mind 111 (442):323-354.
Should the numbers count?John Taurek - 1977 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 6 (4):293-316.
Fairness.John Broome - 1991 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 91:87 - 101.

View all 26 references / Add more references