Abstract
What limits on what can be done to individuals in pursuit of some “greater good” are morally permissible, and under what sorts of circumstances? This depends largely on one’s approach to interpersonal aggregation — that is, summing different goods (or harms) affecting different persons and weighing them against other similarly attained aggregates. I outline four approaches: non-aggregationism (e.g. John Taurek, 1977); asymmetric aggregationism (e.g. Peter Singer in many specialist writings, Alistair Norcross); symmetric aggregationism (e.g. Singer in popular writings); and weak aggregationism (e.g. T.M Scanlon). I conclude by briefly suggesting that the weak approach is the “least worst” one.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.