Ex Ante and Ex Post Contractualism: A Synthesis

The Journal of Ethics 23 (1):77-98 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to contractualist theories in ethics, whether an action is wrong is determined by whether it could be justified to others on grounds no one could reasonably reject. Contractualists then think that reasonable rejectability of principles depends on the strength of the personal objections individuals can make to them. There is, however, a deep disagreement between contractualists concerning from which temporal perspective the relevant objections to different principles are to be made. Are they to be made on the basis of the prospects the principles give to different individuals ex ante or on the basis of the outcomes of the principles ex post? Both answers have been found to be problematic. The ex ante views make irrelevant information about personal identity morally significant and lead to objectionable ex ante rules, whereas ex post views lead to counterintuitive results in the so-called different harm and social risk imposition cases. The aim of this article is to provide a new synthesis of these views that can avoid the problems of the previous alternatives. I call the proposal ‘risk-acknowledging’ ex post contractualism. The crux of the view is to take into account in the comparisons of different objections both the realized harms and the risks under which individuals have to live.

Similar books and articles

On Ex Ante Contractualism.Korbinian Rüger - 2018 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 13 (3).
The Luckless and the Doomed. Contractualism on Justified Risk-Imposition.Sune Holm - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (2):231-244.
Contractualism and risk imposition.James Lenman - 2008 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 7 (1):99-122.
Risk, Contractualism, and Rose's "Prevention Paradox".S. D. John - 2014 - Social Theory and Practice 40 (1):28-50.
What We Owe to Many.Jussi Suikkanen - 2004 - Social Theory and Practice 30 (4):485-506.
Contractualism and the Conditional Fallacy.Jussi Suikkanen - 2014 - Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics 4:113-137.
Contractualism's (not so) slippery slope.Aaron James - 2012 - Legal Theory 18 (3):263-292.
Can Contractualism Save Us from Aggregation.Barbara H. Fried - 2012 - The Journal of Ethics 16 (1):39-66.
Moral contractualism.Nicholas Southwood - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (6):926-937.
Contractualism and the Counter-Culture Challenge.Jussi Suikkanen - 2017 - Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics 7:184-206.
Reply to Zofia Stemplowska.T. M. Scanlon - 2013 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (4):508-514.
Evaluating life or death prospects.Luc Bovens & Marc Fleurbaey - 2012 - Economics and Philosophy 28 (2):217-249.
Act and Principle Contractualism.Hanoch Sheinman - 2011 - Utilitas 23 (3):288-315.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-03-08

Downloads
637 (#14,613)

6 months
84 (#11,544)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jussi Suikkanen
University of Birmingham

Citations of this work

Contractualism and the question of direction.Aaron Salomon - 2022 - European Journal of Philosophy 30 (4):1298-1316.
Contractualism.Jussi Suikkanen - forthcoming - In Michael Hemmingsen (ed.), Ethical Theory in Global Perspective. New York, NY, USA: SUNY Press.
Contractualism.Jussi Suikkanen - 2020 - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Contractualism and utilitarianism.Thomas M. Scanlon - 1982 - In Amartya Kumar Sen & Bernard Arthur Owen Williams (eds.), Utilitarianism and Beyond. Cambridge University Press. pp. 103--128.
Contractualism and Social Risk.Johann Frick - 2015 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 43 (3):175-223.
Risking and Wronging.Rahul Kumar - 2015 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 43 (1):27-51.

View all 25 references / Add more references