RSS

Per­son-af­fect­ing views

TagLast edit: Jul 13, 2022, 10:55 PM by Pablo

In population ethics, person-affecting views are views that attempt to capture the intuition that an outcome can be bad only if it is bad for people. (By ‘people’ it is meant a moral patient rather than a human being.) Derek Parfit distinguishes between narrow person-affecting views, which hold that an outcome can be bad only if it is bad for the people who exist in this outcome, and wide person-affecting views, which allow that an outcome can be bad if some different attainable outcome would have benefited people in it more.

Further reading

Parfit, Derek (1984) Reasons and Persons, Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 393–401.

Thomas, Teruji (2019) The asymmetry, uncertainty, and the long term, Global Priorities Institute, section 2.3.

Related entries

ethics of existential risk | intuition of neutrality | population ethics | total view

Teruji Thomas, ‘The Asym­me­try, Uncer­tainty, and the Long Term’

PabloNov 5, 2019, 8:24 PM
43 points
6 comments1 min readEA link
(globalprioritiesinstitute.org)

Utili­tar­i­anism and the re­place­abil­ity of de­sires and attachments

MichaelStJulesJul 27, 2024, 1:57 AM
34 points
13 comments12 min readEA link

Cri­tique of MacAskill’s “Is It Good to Make Happy Peo­ple?”

Magnus VindingAug 23, 2022, 9:21 AM
223 points
115 comments8 min readEA link

Ac­tu­al­ism, asym­me­try and extinction

MichaelStJulesJan 7, 2025, 4:02 PM
24 points
0 comments9 min readEA link

Against neu­tral­ity about cre­at­ing happy lives

Joe_CarlsmithMar 15, 2021, 1:54 AM
95 points
37 comments11 min readEA link

Puz­zles for Everyone

Richard Y Chappell🔸Sep 10, 2022, 2:11 AM
116 points
38 comments5 min readEA link
(rychappell.substack.com)

Defend­ing the Pro­cre­ation Asym­me­try with Con­di­tional Interests

MichaelStJulesOct 13, 2019, 6:49 PM
34 points
13 comments4 min readEA link

The prob­lem of pos­si­ble pop­u­la­tions: an­i­mal farm­ing, sus­tain­abil­ity, ex­tinc­tion and the re­pug­nant conclusion

StijnJul 6, 2021, 1:17 PM
7 points
9 comments16 min readEA link

The prob­lem with per­son-af­fect­ing views

JackMAug 5, 2020, 6:37 PM
44 points
22 comments3 min readEA link

Per­son-af­fect­ing in­tu­itions can of­ten be money pumped

Rohin ShahJul 7, 2022, 12:23 PM
94 points
69 comments3 min readEA link

A Fis­sion Prob­lem for Per­son-Affect­ing Views (Elliott Thorn­ley)

Global Priorities InstituteNov 7, 2024, 3:01 PM
20 points
2 comments3 min readEA link

The asym­me­try and the far future

John G. HalsteadMar 9, 2017, 10:05 PM
11 points
14 comments6 min readEA link

Con­fused about “mak­ing peo­ple happy” vs. “mak­ing happy peo­ple”

tobiasleenaertJul 16, 2022, 3:07 PM
69 points
47 comments1 min readEA link

“Long-Ter­mism” vs. “Ex­is­ten­tial Risk”

Scott AlexanderApr 6, 2022, 9:41 PM
522 points
81 comments3 min readEA link

The per­son-af­fect­ing value of ex­is­ten­tial risk reduction

Gregory Lewis🔸Apr 13, 2018, 1:44 AM
65 points
33 comments4 min readEA link

How to ne­glect the long term (Hay­den Wilk­in­son)

Global Priorities InstituteOct 13, 2023, 11:09 AM
21 points
0 comments5 min readEA link
(globalprioritiesinstitute.org)

A non-iden­tity dilemma for per­son-af­fect­ing views (Elliott Thorn­ley)

Global Priorities InstituteApr 4, 2024, 4:30 PM
13 points
3 comments3 min readEA link
(globalprioritiesinstitute.org)

My favourite ar­gu­ments against per­son-af­fect­ing views

EJTApr 2, 2024, 10:57 AM
84 points
36 comments17 min readEA link

Repug­nance and replacement

MichaelStJulesApr 11, 2024, 2:40 AM
17 points
29 comments9 min readEA link

Con­di­tional in­ter­ests, asym­me­tries and EA priorities

MichaelStJulesOct 21, 2019, 6:13 AM
22 points
23 comments8 min readEA link

The Non-Iden­tity Prob­lem ex­plained col­lo­quially

Alex VellinsDec 27, 2022, 7:22 AM
5 points
0 comments2 min readEA link

Marginal ex­is­tence and its rele­vance to pro-na­tal­ism, longter­mism, and the re­pug­nant conclusion

dawsoneliasenJan 23, 2023, 3:24 AM
4 points
2 comments8 min readEA link

Com­mon-sense cases where “hy­po­thet­i­cal fu­ture peo­ple” matter

tlevinAug 12, 2022, 2:05 PM
107 points
21 comments4 min readEA link

Jane English on Rawls and du­ties to fu­ture generations

William D'AlessandroNov 6, 2022, 2:25 PM
12 points
3 comments6 min readEA link

The stan­dard per­son-af­fect­ing view doesn’t solve the Repug­nant Con­clu­sion.

GilAug 23, 2022, 7:58 PM
21 points
6 comments1 min readEA link
No comments.