Abstract

This discussion completes 'Moral Dilemmas, Compromise and Compensation' ("Philosophy", Vol. 66. No. 257, July 1991). In correction of the earlier discussion, the claim that resolution of moral dilemmas by compromise is always preferable to resolution by compensation, is withdrawn. In a particular case, the decision which is preferable requires judgment (Subsec. 3.8). In amplification of the earlier discussion, it is observed that another way of resolving moral conflicts is what M P. Follett calls 'Integration'. In this, the one claimant is made better off and the other claimant is made no worse off. This is in fact an application of a principle of Pareto's. Here again, in a particular case, the decision whether resolution by integration is preferable to resolution by compromise, requires judgment (Subsec. 3.5)