IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pophec/v17y2018i2p192-215.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How it makes a moral difference that one is worse off than one could have been

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Otsuka

    (London School of Economics, UK)

Abstract

In this article, I argue that it makes a moral difference whether an individual is worse off than she could have been. Here, I part company with consequentialists such as Parfit and side with contractualists such as Scanlon. But, unlike some contractualists, I reject the view that all that matters is whether a principle can be justified to each particular individual, where such a justification is attentive to her interests, complaints and other claims. The anonymous goodness of a distribution also matters. My attempt to reconcile contractualist and consequentialist approaches proceeds via a serious of reflections on cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Otsuka, 2018. "How it makes a moral difference that one is worse off than one could have been," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 17(2), pages 192-215, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:17:y:2018:i:2:p:192-215
    DOI: 10.1177/1470594X17731394
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1470594X17731394
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1470594X17731394?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Otsuka, Michael, 2012. "Prioritarianism and the Separateness of Persons," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 365-380, September.
    2. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    2. Ole Røgeberg & Morten Nordberg, 2005. "A defence of absurd theories in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 543-562.
    3. Julia M. Puaschunder, 2023. "Behavioral Economics for All: From Nudging to Leadership," RAIS Conference Proceedings 2022-2024 0293, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
    4. Stoyan V. Sgourev & Ezra W. Zuckerman, 2011. "Breaking up is hard to do: Irrational inconsistency in commitment to an industry peer network," Rationality and Society, , vol. 23(1), pages 3-34, February.
    5. Laurette Dubé & Antoine Bechara & Ulf Böckenholt & Asim Ansari & Alain Dagher & Mark Daniel & Wayne DeSarbo & Lesley Fellows & Ross Hammond & Terry Huang & Scott Huettel & Yan Kestens & Bärbel Knäuper, 2009. "Towards a brain-to-society systems model of individual choice," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 105-106, March.
    6. Yan, Xiaoming & Zhao, Wenhan & Yu, Yugang, 2022. "Optimal product line design with reference price effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(3), pages 1045-1062.
    7. Christopher Tyson, 2015. "Satisficing behavior with a secondary criterion," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 639-661, March.
    8. Saptarshi Mukherjee, 2014. "Choice in ordered-tree-based decision problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 471-496, August.
    9. Attila Ambrus & Kareen Rozen, 2015. "Rationalising Choice with Multi‐self Models," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(585), pages 1136-1156, June.
    10. Berg, Nathan & Biele, Guido & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2010. "Does consistency predict accuracy of beliefs?: Economists surveyed about PSA," MPRA Paper 26590, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. M. Ali Khan & Metin Uyanık, 2021. "Topological connectedness and behavioral assumptions on preferences: a two-way relationship," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(2), pages 411-460, March.
    12. Félix-Fernando Muñoz & María-Isabel Encinar, 2019. "Some elements for a definition of an evolutionary efficiency criterion," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 919-937, July.
    13. Alfio Giarlotta & Angelo Petralia & Stephen Watson, 2022. "Semantics meets attractiveness: Choice by salience," Papers 2204.08798, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    14. Pierre Livet, 2006. "Identities, capabilities and revisions," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 327-348.
    15. Nicolas Houy, 2008. "Prudent choices and rationality," Working Papers hal-00360518, HAL.
    16. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2016. "Mentalism Versus Behaviourism In Economics: A Philosophy-Of-Science Perspective," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 249-281, July.
    17. Paul Dolan & Daniel Kahneman, 2008. "Interpretations Of Utility And Their Implications For The Valuation Of Health," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 215-234, January.
    18. Jorge Iván González, 2016. "Sentimientos y racionalidad en economía," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Economía, edition 1, number 75, March.
    19. Georg KIRCHSTEIGER & Clemens PUPPE, 1994. "Intransitive Choices Based on Transitive Preferences: The Case of Menu-Dependent Information," Vienna Economics Papers vie9404, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    20. Robin Maialeh, 2019. "Generalization of results and neoclassical rationality: unresolved controversies of behavioural economics methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1743-1761, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:17:y:2018:i:2:p:192-215. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.