Scanlon and the claims of the many versus the one

Analysis 60 (3):288–293 (2000)
In "What We Owe to Each Other", T. M. <span class='Hi'>Scanlon</span> argues that one should save the greater number when faced with the choice between saving one life and two or more different lives. It is, <span class='Hi'>Scanlon</span> claims, a virtue of this argument (which is traceable to Frances Kamm) that it does not appeal to the claims of groups of individuals but only to the claims of individuals. I demonstrate that this argument for saving the greater number, indeed, depends, contrary to what <span class='Hi'>Scanlon</span> says, upon an appeal to the claim of a group of individuals to be saved.
Keywords Choice Consequentialism Ethics Scanlon   T Taurek   J
Categories (categorize this paper)
 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: 12,709
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
Nicholas Southwood (2009). Moral Contractualism. Philosophy Compass 4 (6):926-937.

View all 10 citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

55 ( #33,671 of 1,413,339 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

3 ( #67,207 of 1,413,339 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

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