Posts Tagged 'Broome'

preference-based utilitarism?

rematei o artigo de John Broome -do que xa son fan“preference-based utilitarism?” que de xeito moi consecuente conclúe:

10. Conclusion
I conclude that preferencist utilitarianism fails. Preferencism cannot generate a concept of good solid enough to make sense of interpersonal comparisons of good. Interpersonal comparisons can only be achieved by means of a different, nonpreferencist theory of good.

Fleurbebaey, Salles and Weymark. 2008. páx 237.

E son fan tanto do artigo como do estilo:

But Harsanyi and others think they have a way of overcoming this problem.16 They claim that, once we understand the idea of extended preferences properly, we shall see that  everyone has the same extended preferences as everyone else. Extended preferences are universal. Consequently, there is a firm preferencist basis for making interpersonal comparisons of degrees of preference.
I am sure this is wrong. There is no reason why people should all have the same extended preferences, and many reasons why they should not. One reason why not is that people have different values. Their values will help to determine their preferences between different lives, so these preferences will differ. For instance, I value philosophy more highly than economics, so I prefer working as a philosopher and having the characteristics of a philosopher to working as an economist and having the characteristics of an economist. I imagine many economists might have the opposite preference. To be sure, when comparing my life with an economist’s, I must do it properly. In deciding whether I prefer the life and characteristics of an economist, I am supposed to take account of everything that goes with them, including having the values of an economist. I must recognize that if I had the characteristics of an economist, I would value the life of an economist. But it is my extended preferences we are talking about, not the economist’s extended preferences. As it happens, I prefer not to have the values of an economist. That is one reason I prefer not to be an economist.

Ibid, páx. 231