Aggregation in an infinite, relativistic universe.

Erkenntnis:1-29 (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Aggregative moral theories face a series of devastating problems when we apply them in a physically realistic setting. According to current physics, our universe is likely _infinitely large_, and will contain infinitely many morally valuable events. But standard aggregative theories are ill-equipped to compare outcomes containing infinite total value so, applied in a realistic setting, they cannot compare any outcomes a real-world agent must ever choose between. This problem has been discussed extensively, and non-standard aggregative theories proposed to overcome it. This paper addresses a further problem of similar severity. Physics tells us that, in our universe, how remotely in time an event occurs is _relative_. But our most promising aggregative theories, designed to compare outcomes containing infinitely many valuable events, are sensitive to how remote in time those events are. As I show, the evaluations of those theories are then relative too. But this is absurd; evaluations of outcomes must be absolute. So we must reject such theories. Is this objection fatal for all aggregative theories, at least in a relativistic universe like ours? I demonstrate here that, by further modifying these theories to fit with the physics, we can overcome it.

Similar books and articles

Infinite aggregation.Hayden Wilkinson - 2021 - Dissertation, Australian National University
Infinite Aggregation and Risk.Hayden Wilkinson - 2023 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 101 (2):340-359.
Infinite aggregation: expanded addition.Hayden Wilkinson - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 178 (6):1917-1949.
Aggregating infinitely many probability measures.Frederik Herzberg - 2015 - Theory and Decision 78 (2):319-337.
Throwing Darts, Time, and the Infinite.Jeremy Gwiazda - 2013 - Erkenntnis 78 (5):971-975.
Transcending the infinite utility debate.Tim Mulgan - 2002 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 80 (2):164 – 177.
Infinite chains and antichains in computable partial orderings.E. Herrmann - 2001 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (2):923-934.
Utilitarianism and infinite utility.Peter Vallentyne - 1993 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 71 (2):212 – 217.


Added to PP

367 (#51,006)

6 months
95 (#37,848)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Hayden Wilkinson
University of Oxford

References found in this work

The singularity: A philosophical analysis.David J. Chalmers - 2010 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 17 (9-10):9 - 10.
Weighing lives.John Broome - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Why Boltzmann Brains Are Bad.Sean M. Carroll - 2020 - In Shamik Dasgupta, Brad Weslake & Ravit Dotan (eds.), Current Controversies in Philosophy of Science. London: Routledge. pp. 7-20.
Infinite Aggregation and Risk.Hayden Wilkinson - 2023 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 101 (2):340-359.

View all 19 references / Add more references