Incommensurateness is vagueness

John Broome

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

    Abstract

    We often encounter pairs of objects where neither seems better than the other, and yet they do not seem to be equally good. I say they are incommensurate. The aim of this chapter is to argue that incommensurateness is no more than the vagueness of comparative relations such as betterness. Other relations besides betterness exhibit incommensurateness. For example, we may encounter two colors where neither seems redder than the other, and yet they do not seem to be equally red. I provide two arguments neither conclusive that support the view that incommensurateness is generally vagueness. Then I consider betterness in particular. This is a practically important relation because of its connection with normativity. On the basis of this connection with normativity, I provide a further argument in support of the view that the incommensurateness of betterness is vagueness. The argument is that vagueness provides the best account of a classic normative problem that is raised by the incommensurateness of betterness.
    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationValue Incommensurability: Ethics, Risk, and Decision-Making
    Place of PublicationNew York, USA
    PublisherRoutledge
    Pages29-49
    Volume1
    ISBN (Print)978-0-367-70218-2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2021

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Incommensurateness is vagueness'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this