Abstract
In cases where the claims of different groups of people compete, the Relevance View occupies a middle ground between aggregation and nonaggregation. It allows weaker claims to aggregate to outweigh a stronger claim just when the competing claims, compared pairwise, are sufficiently close in strength. The view has strong intuitive appeal when applied to simple binary choices, but I argue that attempts to extend it to nonbinary choices have been unsuccessful. I propose a new extension of the Relevance View to nonbinary choices based on a “binary contrastive” account of the moral reasons that obtain in the cases of interest.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 382-413 |
Number of pages | 32 |
Journal | Ethics |
Volume | 132 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Jan 2022 |