Prioritarianism and Other-Regarding Decision-Making under Risk
In the present contribution I attempt to refute a recent challenge raised by Michael Otsuka against prioritarianism, according to which the priority view is objectionable since it rejects the moral permissibility of choosing in accordance with rational self-interest – understood as maximization of e...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic/Print Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Peeters
[2017]
|
In: |
Ethical perspectives
Year: 2017, Volume: 24, Issue: 2, Pages: 199-224 |
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Otsuka, Michael 1964-
/ Justice
/ Emergency
/ Priority
/ Expected utility
/ Self-interest
|
IxTheo Classification: | NCA Ethics NCC Social ethics |
Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) |
Summary: | In the present contribution I attempt to refute a recent challenge raised by Michael Otsuka against prioritarianism, according to which the priority view is objectionable since it rejects the moral permissibility of choosing in accordance with rational self-interest – understood as maximization of expected utility – in one-person cases involving other-regarding decision-making under risk. I claim that Otsuka’s argument is bound to make an illegitimate move, which is either to assume implausibly that individuals are generally risk-neutral or to assume implausibly that the decision-maker in his cases can have accurate information on the attitudes towards risk held by the individual on behalf of whom the decision is taken. I argue, pace Otsuka, that acting in accordance with rational self-interest in cases characterized by these types of epistemic constraints requires that we adopt a view on other-regarding decision-making that takes into account general empirical facts about human nature and that prioritarianism does not conflict with this latter view |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1370-0049 |
Contains: | Enthalten in: Ethical perspectives
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2143/EP.24.2.3218002 |