Eric Wiland
University of Missouri, St. Louis
What is group well-being? There is, as of yet, shockingly little philosophical literature explicitly aiming to answer this question. This essay sketches some of the logical space of possible answers, and nudges us to seriously consider certain overlooked options. There are several importantly different ways the well-being of a collective or a group could be related to the well-being of the individuals who constitute it: 1) eliminativism, 2) functionalism, 3) partialism, or 4) the independent view. If the relation between individual and collective well-being is either functional or partial, then we face a further question: What is the direction of constitutive dependence? Does the well-being of a group depend upon the well-being of the well-being of the individuals who compose it, or does the well-being of an individual depend upon the well-being of the groups to which they belong? Or both? These questions raise some puzzles that I begin to resolve. I conclude that there might be a wide variety of ways the well-being of a collective obtains, only some of which are related to the well-being of the individuals who are its members. In the end, I hope to vindicate the thought that an injury to one is an injury to all.
Keywords groups  well-being
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.26556/jesp.v21i1.1293
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,979
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

Two Concepts of Rules.John Rawls - 1955 - Philosophical Review 64 (1):3-32.
Collective Intentions and Actions.John Searle - 1990 - In Philip R. Cohen Jerry Morgan & Martha Pollack (eds.), Intentions in Communication. MIT Press. pp. 401-415.
Facts and Values.Peter Railton - 1986 - Philosophical Topics 14 (2):5-31.
Group Assertion.Jennifer Lackey - 2018 - Erkenntnis 83 (1):21-42.
Three Kinds of Collective Attitudes.Christian List - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S9):1601-1622.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Complexity of Groups: A Comment on Jorge Valadez.Martha C. Nussbaum - 2003 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 29 (1):57-69.
Group Risks, Risks to Groups, and Group Engagement in Genetics Research.Daniel M. Hausman - 2007 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (4):351-369.
The Ontology of Social Groups.Amie Thomasson - 2019 - Synthese 196 (12):4829-4845.
Effective Aspects of Profinite Groups.Rick L. Smith - 1981 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 46 (4):851-863.
The Legitimacy of Groups: Toward a We-Reasoning View.Agnes Tam - 2020 - Analyse & Kritik 42 (2):343-368.
Group Privacy: A Defence and an Interpretation.Luciano Floridi - 2017 - In Bart van der Sloot, Luciano Floridi & Linnet Taylor (eds.), Group Privacy. Springer Verlag.
Redundant Group Agency.Lars J. K. Moen - 2019 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 49 (5):364-384.
Group Membership and Parthood.David Strohmaier - 2018 - Journal of Social Ontology 4 (2):121-135.
The Epistemology of Groups.Jennifer Lackey - 2020 - Oxford University Press.


Added to PP index

Total views
16 ( #665,281 of 2,505,145 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
16 ( #51,890 of 2,505,145 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes