Australasian Journal of Philosophy 73 (3):401 – 404 (1995)
Suppose we wish to decide which of a pair of actions has better consequences in a case in which both actions result in infinite utility. Peter Vallentyne and others have proposed that one action has better consequences than a second if there is a time after which the cumulative utility of the first action always outstrips the cumulative utility of the second. I argue against this principle, in particular I show how cases may arise in which up to any point of time action a1 produces more utility than action a2, yet for each individual involved a2 produces more utility
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Rationality with Respect to People, Places, and Times.Larry S. Temkin - 2015 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (5-6):576-608.
Infinite Utility: Insisting on Strong Monotonicity.Luc Lauwers - 1997 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 75 (2):222 – 233.
Sacrificing the Patrol: Utilitarianism, Future Generations and Infinity.Luc van Liedekerke & Luc Lauwers - 1997 - Economics and Philosophy 13 (2):159-174.
Similar books and articles
Infinite Utility: Anonymity and Person-Centredness.Peter Vallentyne - 1995 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 73 (3):413 – 420.
Consequentialist Reactions to Cain's Objection From the Individual.Jean-Paul Vessel - 2005 - Southwest Philosophy Review 21 (2):139-144.
Taking Stock of Infinite Value: Pascal's Wager and Relative Utilities.Paul Bartha - 2007 - Synthese 154 (1):5 - 52.
Utilitarianism and Infinite Utility.Peter Vallentyne - 1993 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 71 (2):212 – 217.
The Problem of Endless Joy: Is Infinite Utility Too Much for Utilitarianism?J. L. A. Garcia & Mark T. Nelson - 1994 - Utilitas 6 (2):183.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads175 ( #25,508 of 2,158,679 )
Recent downloads (6 months)34 ( #9,665 of 2,158,679 )
How can I increase my downloads?