What is Wrong with Kamm's and Scanlon's Arguments Against Taurek

  • Doggett T
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Abstract: In forced choices between lives, where one group is larger than the other, Taurek claims you can save the few. Kamm and Scanlon argue that this is unfair. I argue it is fair. By Kamm’s and Scanlon’s own lights, it is fair. Kamm and Scanlon also try to explain why you are, in these forced choices, required to save the many. These attempts can be interpreted in three ways. I argue none works. By Kamm’s and Scanlon’s own lights, the most promising one does not work.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Doggett, T. (2017). What is Wrong with Kamm’s and Scanlon’s Arguments Against Taurek. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 3(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v3i3.36

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free