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
    We cannot exorcise the paradoxes of population ethics by ... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    We cannot exorcise the paradoxes of population ethics by giving up the transitivity of 'better than'

    Consequentialism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Temkin's intransitivity solution presupposes that 'better than' can be essentially comparative, yet population ethics paradoxes arise even under monadic value assessments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If paradoxes survive the elimination of relational comparison entirely, transitivity failure is revealed as epiphenomenal rather than causally responsible for the paradoxes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Parfit's original cases in 'Reasons and Persons' demonstrate repugnant conclusions through independent evaluative steps, each of which is non-comparative and individually compelling.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Stuart Rachels and Temkin acknowledge that abandoning transitivity generates what they call 'essentially comparative' value, yet this move simply relocates rather than resolves the underlying tension between quantity and quality of welfare.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any framework replacing transitive 'better than' must still assign action-guidance under conditions where Arrhenius's impossibility theorems show no consistent population axiology can satisfy all plausible adequacy conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Because Arrhenius's formal impossibility results are axiology-neutral and apply across both transitive and non-transitive orderings, non-transitivity provides no principled escape from the paradoxes Arrhenius identifies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The mere addition argument can be reconstructed on the normative level in terms of what one ought to choose, without appeal to transitivity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The normative reconstruction yields a moral dilemma in which all available actions are forbidden
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A non-transitive value ordering cannot form the basis of a satisfactory answer to what one ought to choose
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageConsequentialism

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility2 linkedMoral Responsibility2 linked

    Related

    A non-transitive value ordering cannot ground a satisfactory answer to what one ...Any framework replacing transitive 'better than' must still assign action-guidan...Because Arrhenius's formal impossibility results are axiology-neutral and apply ...If paradoxes survive the elimination of relational comparison entirely, transiti...
    +5 moreShow less
    Parfit's original cases in 'Reasons and Persons' demonstrate repugnant conclusio...Stuart Rachels and Temkin acknowledge that abandoning transitivity generates wha...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: repugnant-conclusion
    View source passageHide passage
    One of the questions raised by this radical proposal is whether arguments like the mere addition paradox themselves justify the rejection of transitivity or whether further arguments are needed since transitivity seems to be part of the meaning and logic of the relation “better than” (Broome 2004). However, it has been suggested that there are two “better than”-concepts, one based on intrinsic value and one based on the stance that one ought to take towards the evaluated objects (Arrhenius 2004;
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Temkin's intransitivity solution presupposes that 'better than' can be essential...
    The mere addition argument can be reconstructed on the normative level in terms ...
    The normative reconstruction yields a moral dilemma in which all available actio...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit