Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Bergson and Samuelson held that individual utility functi... — Carmelics
    Home/Consequentialism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Opponents of Bergson and Samuelson misunderstood their position rather than successfully refuting it.

    Bergson and Samuelson held that individual utility functions are to be constructed from preference orderings via fairness principles, not assumed to carry cardinal or interpersonally comparable information.

    ConsequentialismSocial Contract
    ?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.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    ConsequentialismSocial Contract

    Key Terms

    Bergson
    Henri Bergson was a French philosopher (1859-1941) who argued that life and consciousness cannot be fully understood through science and logic alone, and that we need to trust our intuition and direct experience to grasp reality. He believed that time flows continuously like a stream rather than as separate, measurable moments, and that living things have a creative force driving their evolution. His ideas influenced how people think about creativity, freedom, and the nature of existence, earning him the Nobel Prize in Literature.
    Cardinal information(as information that utility functions should not assume to carry)
    Measurable numbers that show how much more you prefer one thing over another; for instance, saying 'I like pizza twice as much as salad' gives cardinal information.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Consequentialism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Fairness principles(as the method for constructing utility functions instead of making assumptions)
    Rules or standards about what counts as just or equitable treatment when making decisions that affect people.
    Interpersonally comparable(as information that utility functions should not assume to carry)
    The ability to compare one person's satisfaction or happiness directly with another person's; for example, knowing whether your happiness from eating ice cream is greater than your friend's happiness from the same ice cream.
    Preference orderings(as the starting point for constructing utility functions)
    A ranking of options from most to least preferred; for example, if you like pizza more than salad and salad more than broccoli, that's your preference ordering.
    Samuelson(as a reference to a specific economist's ideas)
    Paul Samuelson was a famous 20th-century economist who developed important theories about how people make choices and what we can learn from their preferences.
    Utility functions(as the subject being constructed from preferences)
    A mathematical way of representing how much satisfaction or happiness a person gets from different choices or goods; basically a formula that predicts what makes someone happy.

    Connections

    3 topics

    Truth & Knowledge2 linkedModality & Possibility1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Critics treated the W(U1,…,Un) formula as requiring richer utility information t...Opponents of Bergson and Samuelson misunderstood their position rather than succ...The logical possibility of constructing such utility functions from ordinal non-...

    Similar

    Bergson and Samuelson did not specify which fairness principles justif...93%Individual utility functions in the W(U1(x),…,Un(x)) formula can be co...88%They held that fairness principles applied to individual preference or...86%Extended preference orderings and utility-based formulations are forma...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: economic-justice
    View source passageHide passage
    Bergson (1938) and Samuelson (1947, 1981) occupy a special position, which may be described as a third way between old and new welfare economics. From the former, they retain the goal of making complete and consistent social welfare judgments with the help of well-defined social welfare functions. The formula W(U1(x),…,Un(x)) is often named a “Bergson-Samuelson social welfare function” (x is the social state; Ui(x), for i=1,…,n, is individual i’s utility in this state). With the latter, however,

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective