Why One Should Count Only Claims with which One Can Sympathize

Public Health Ethics 10 (2):148-156 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
When one faces competing claims of varying strength on public resources for health, which claims count? This paper proposes the following answer. One should count, or aggregate, a person’s claim just in case one could sympathize with her desire to prioritize her own claim over the strongest competing claim. It argues that this principle yields appealing case judgments and has a plausible grounding in both sympathetic identification with each person, taken separately, and respect for the person for whom most is at stake. It also defends this principle against several heretofore unanswered objections.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
VOOWOS
Revision history
Archival date: 2016-02-05
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2016-02-05

Total views
187 ( #14,708 of 38,910 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
25 ( #17,046 of 38,910 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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