Rational Numbers: A Non‐Consequentialist Explanation Of Why You Should Save The Many And Not The Few

Philosophical Quarterly 63 (252):413-427 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
You ought to save a larger group of people rather than a distinct smaller group of people, all else equal. A consequentialist may say that you ought to do so because this produces the most good. If a non-consequentialist rejects this explanation, what alternative can he or she give? This essay defends the following explanation, as a solution to the so-called numbers problem. Its two parts can be roughly summarised as follows. First, you are morally required to want the survival of each stranger for its own sake. Secondly, you are rationally required to achieve as many of these ends as possible, if you have these ends
No keywords specified (fix it)
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2013-12-08
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
A Defense of Abortion.Thomson, Judith Jarvis
Good and Evil.Geach, Peter
Fairness.Broome, John

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
320 ( #14,005 of 50,213 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
43 ( #14,126 of 50,213 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.