Classical utilitarianism and Parfit's repugnant conclusion: A reply to McMahan

Ethics 92 (1):128-133 (1981)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,458

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Reverse Repugnant Conclusion.Tim Mulgan - 2002 - Utilitas 14 (3):360.
The Repugnant Conclusion.Joakim Sandberg - 2011 - In Michael Bruce & Steven Barbone (eds.), Just the Arguments. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley‐Blackwell. pp. 247–248.
Repugnance or intransitivity: A repugnant but forced choice.Stuart Rachels - 2004 - In Torbjörn Tännsjö & Jesper Ryberg (eds.), The Repugnant Conclusion: Essays on Population Ethics. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 163–86.
Does the repugnant conclusion have any probative force?Christopher Cowie - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (12):3021-3039.
Repugnance or Intransitivity: A Repugnant But Forced Choice.Stuart Rachels - 2004 - In Torbjörn Tännsjö & Jesper Ryberg (eds.), The Repugnant Conclusion: Essays on Population Ethics. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 163--86.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
64 (#332,081)

6 months
10 (#413,587)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references