Graduate studies at Western
Utilitas 16 (1):62-79 (2004)
|Abstract||This article considers the reach of arguments for saving the greater number without interpersonal aggregation, and argues that interpersonal aggregation is useful to encompass the proper respect due to each separate person. I first give a precise definition of interpersonal aggregation, which many non-utilitarians try to avoid. Then, I show that consequentialism and Scanlon can justify the case for the greater number without interpersonal aggregation. However, I propose the Aggregation Approach, which justifies the case for the greater number in some cases and the case for tossing a fair coin in other cases. I conclude that interpersonal aggregation does not disrespect the separate person.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Franz Dietrich & Christian List, The Aggregation of Propositional Attitudes: Towards a General Theory.
Franz Dietrich Christian List, The Aggregation of Propositional Attitudes: Towards a General Theory.
Frederik Herzberg & Daniel Eckert (2012). Impossibility Results for Infinite-Electorate Abstract Aggregation Rules. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (1):273-286.
Franz Dietrich & Philippe Mongin (2010). The Premiss-Based Approach to Judgment Aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory 145 (2):562-582.
Barbara H. Fried (2012). Can Contractualism Save Us From Aggregation? Journal of Ethics 16 (1):39-66.
S. Matthew Liao (2008). Who Is Afraid of Numbers? Utilitas 20 (04):447-.
Christian List (2012). The Theory of Judgment Aggregation: An Introductory Review. Synthese 187 (1):179-207.
Franz Dietrich & Christian List (2007). Arrow's Theorem in Judgment Aggregation. Social Choice and Welfare 29 (1):19-33.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads68 ( #15,842 of 739,667 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #17,197 of 739,667 )
How can I increase my downloads?