Egalitarianism and Repugnant Conclusions

Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 38:115-125 (2003)
Abstract
Most philosophers discuss the Repugnant Conclusion as an objection to total utilitarianism. But this focus on total utilitarianism seems to be one-sided. It conceals the important fact that other competing moral theories are also subject to the Repugnant Conclusion. The primary aim of this paper is to demonstrate that versions of egalitarianism are subject to the Repugnant Conclusion and other repugnant conclusions.
Keywords egalitarianism  repugnant conslusion  Parfit  Tännsjö
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
The Repugnant Conclusion.Jesper Ryberg, Torbjörn Tännsjö & Gustaf Arrhenius - 2006 - The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Online; Last Accessed October 4:2006.
The Repugnant Conclusion.Jesper Ryberg - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
In Defence of Repugnance.Michael Huemer - 2008 - Mind 117 (468):899-933.
Is the Repugnant Conclusion Repugnant?Jesper Ryberg - 1996 - Philosophical Papers 25 (3):161-177.
Virtue Ethics and Repugnant Conclusions.Matt Zwolinski & David Schmidtz - 2005 - In R. Sandler & P. Cafaro (eds.), Environmental Virtue Ethics. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 107--17.
Added to PP index
2012-06-27

Total downloads
270 ( #12,888 of 2,202,717 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #97,530 of 2,202,717 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature