Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Intricate EthicsRights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

F. M. Kamm

Print publication date: 2007

Print ISBN-13: 9780195189698

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: October 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189698.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 17 June 2019

Aggregation and Two Moral Methods

Aggregation and Two Moral Methods

Chapter:
(p.48) 2 Aggregation and Two Moral Methods
Source:
Intricate Ethics
Author(s):

F. M. Kamm

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189698.003.0003

This chapter explores whether the number of people we can help counts morally in deciding what to do in conflict situations when we cannot help everyone. It begins by reconsidering the arguments of John Taurek and Elizabeth Anscombe as to whether the number of people we can help counts morally. It then examines arguments that numbers should count which has been give by Thomas Scanlon and criticism of them by Michael Otsuka. It discusses how different conceptions of the moral method known as pairwise comparison are at work in these different arguments and what the ideas of balancing and tiebreaking signify for decision making in various types of cases. It contrasts two subcategories of pairwise comparison—confrontation and substitution—by which conflicts might be resolved in a nonconsequentialist theory, and argues that substitution is permissible. The chapter concludes by considering how another moral method, known as “virtual divisibility,” functions and what it helps to reveal about an argument by Otsuka against those who do not think that numbers count.

Keywords:   John Taurek, Elizabeth Anscombe, Michael Otsuka, Thomas Scanlon, pairwise comparison, confrontation, substitution, conflicts, virtual divisibility, nonconsequentialist theory

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .