Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Arguments for a Better World: Essays in Honor of Amartya SenVolume I: Ethics, Welfare, and Measurement$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Kaushik Basu and Ravi Kanbur

Print publication date: 2008

Print ISBN-13: 9780199239115

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2009

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199239115.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 13 November 2019

The Sen System of Social Evaluation

The Sen System of Social Evaluation

Chapter:
(p.15) Chapter 2 The Sen System of Social Evaluation
Source:
Arguments for a Better World: Essays in Honor of Amartya Sen
Author(s):

S. R. Osmani

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199239115.003.0003

This chapter argues that Amartya Sen's writings in the diverse fields of development economics, social choice, and moral philosophy add up to an integrated and coherent system of social evaluation, and the chapter also provides a brief outline of that system. As an expositional device, the major elements of this system are best described by contrasting them with the three main components of utilitarianism — namely, consequentialism, welfarism, and sum-ranking. Consequentialism refers to a methodology of social evaluation in which the goodness or rightness of some action or rule is judged solely with reference to its consequences, without attaching any intrinsic value to the nature of the act, or the agent who acted, or the process through which the consequent state of affairs came about. While most critiques of utilitarianism reject consequentialism, Sen argues strongly in favour retaining the moral salience of consequences but in a manner that can also accord due weight to relevant non-consequence features and suggests ways in which this can be done. Welfarism judges the goodness of consequences solely in terms of the utilities enjoyed by individuals. Sen rejects welfarism and suggests replacing utility by the notion of freedom, i.e., the opportunity people have to live the kind of life they have reason to value. At the same time, he also rejects income or resources or anything else that has an instrumental role in achieving freedom as the basis of social evaluation. Sum-ranking employs a simple method of aggregation, for the purpose of social evaluation, that involves adding the well-being of all individuals. By contrast, Sen proposes a much more nuanced approach to aggregation that allows for the existence of multiple values — both across individuals and for the same individual — and sees possible incompleteness of social choice as a virtue rather than as a weakness of a system of social evaluation.

Keywords:   social evaluation, social choice, freedom, capability, consequentialism, welfarism

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 .