Agent-relative consequentialism thus fails to accurately model the commonsense intuitions it claims to capture, because it treats as scalar what commonsense treats as lexically prior.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Commonsense intuitions(as used in philosophy): The ordinary, instinctive beliefs and judgments that most people naturally make about how things work or what's right, based on everyday experience rather than formal training.
Lexically prior(as describing the ordering of values): Something that comes first in importance or priority, like how 'A' comes before 'B' in alphabetical order; here it means treating something as more important than everything else.
Scalar(describing how species richness reduces biodiversity to one misleading number): A single number or measurement that flattens something complex into one simple value.
agent-relative consequentialism(Introduced as a response to transplant-type counterexamples to standard consequentialism): A version of consequentialism holding that an act is morally wrong if and only if the act's consequences include less overall value from the perspective of the agent performing the act.

Based on where you are in your exploration