The Strong-Tie Requirement and Objective-List Theories of Well-Being
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice (forthcoming)
| Abstract | Many philosophers with hedonistic sympathies (e.g., Mill, Sidgwick, Sumner, Feldman, Crisp, Heathwood, and Bradley) have claimed that well-being is necessarily experiential. Kagan once claimed something slightly different, saying that, although unexperienced bodily events can directly impact a person’s well-being, it is nonetheless true that any change in a person’s well-being must involve a change in her (i.e., either in her mind or in her body). Kagan elaborated by saying that a person’s well-being cannot float freely of her such that it is affected by events that do not affect her (Kagan 1992, 169-189). These two claims – that well-being is necessarily experiential and that changes in well-being must involve changes in the person – are two different ways of specifying the general intuition that a person’s well-being must be strongly tied to her. This general intuition imposes an adequacy constraint on welfare theorizing: To be adequate, a welfare theory cannot allow that someone can be directly benefited by events that are not strongly tied to her. Call this the strong-tie requirement. The strong-tie requirement is easily satisfied by welfare hedonism, but it poses problems for desire-fulfillment welfare theories and objective-list welfare theories. Though a great deal has been written about desire-fulfillment welfare theories in relation to the strong-tie requirement, not as much has been written about objective-list welfare theories in relation to the strong-tie requirement. This paper argues that objective-list welfare theories can satisfy the strong-tie requirement, though probably only if they take a perfectionist form, as opposed to a brute-list form. | |||||||||
| Keywords | well-being welfare welfare hedonism objective-list theories perfectionism | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesL. W. Sumner (1996). Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Jennifer S. Hawkins (2010). The Subjective Intuition. Philosophical Studies 148 (1).
Thomas S. Petersen (2009). What is It for a Life to Go Well (or Badly)?: Some Critical Comment of Waynes Sumner's Theory of Welfare. Journal of Happiness Studies 10:449-458.
William Lauinger (forthcoming). The Missing-Desires Objection to Hybrid Theories of Well-Being. Southern Journal of Philosophy.
Chris Heathwood (2011). Desire-Based Theories of Reasons, Pleasure, and Welfare. Oxford Studies in Metaethics 6:79-106.
Jason Raibley (2010). Well-Being and the Priority of Values. Social Theory and Practice 36 (4):593-620.
Jason R. Raibley (2012). Welfare Over Time and the Case for Holism. Philosophical Papers 41 (2):239 - 265.
William Lauinger (2011). Dead Sea Apples and Desire-Fulfillment Welfare Theories. Utilitas 23 (03):324-343.
Kirsten Schmidt (2011). Concepts of Animal Welfare in Relation to Positions in Animal Ethics. Acta Biotheoretica 59 (2):153-171.
Bradford Skow (2009). Preferentism and the Paradox of Desire. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 2009.
Chris Heathwood (2006). Desire Satisfactionism and Hedonism. Philosophical Studies 128 (3):539-563.
Peter Vallentyne (1991). The Problem of Unauthorized Welfare. Noûs 25:295-321.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2012-10-18Total downloads9 ( #113,941 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
