To your left, three strangers are drowning. To your right, one other stranger is drowning. You can effortlessly save the three by throwing a lifebuoy to your left. Alternatively, you can save the one by throwing the lifebuoy to your right. You cannot save all four. What should you do? It’s wrong to do nothing, but is it wrong to save just the one stranger? Are you morally required to save the three? Many claim that, when those you can help are innocent strangers with similar interests at stake, you’re required to save the greater number. Is this claim justified? This essay reviews some doubts
Have you a duty to save the greater rather than the lesser number from death when you cannot save al...
In the distribution of resources, persons must be respected, or so many philosophers contend. Unfort...
Faced with the choice between saving one person and saving two others, what should we do? It seems i...
To your left, three strangers are drowning. To your right, one other stranger is drowning. You can e...
Most people find it irritatingly childish to wonder whether there is anything wrong if a lifeguard w...
In his paper, “Should the Numbers Count?" John Taurek imagines that we are in a position such that w...
Discussion of the “problem of numbers” in morality has focused almost exclusively on the moral signi...
BOAT: Two boats are about to sink. There are five people on boat X, and there is one person on boat ...
Suppose that each of the following four conditions obtains: 1. You can save either a greater or a le...
Questioning the ethical reasoning behind ways of attributing value to lives impacts philosophical di...
This is a book about duties to help others. When do you have to sacrifice life and limb, time and mo...
The canonical case that psychologists, philosophers, and policy analysts reflect upon in considering...
Joe Horton’s all-or-nothing problem concerns a situation in which it is morally permissible to do no...
A very short, exegetical paper about Taurek's "Should the Numbers Count?," arguing against the view ...
One major challenge in moral theory has been to account for some intuitively striking moral differen...
Have you a duty to save the greater rather than the lesser number from death when you cannot save al...
In the distribution of resources, persons must be respected, or so many philosophers contend. Unfort...
Faced with the choice between saving one person and saving two others, what should we do? It seems i...
To your left, three strangers are drowning. To your right, one other stranger is drowning. You can e...
Most people find it irritatingly childish to wonder whether there is anything wrong if a lifeguard w...
In his paper, “Should the Numbers Count?" John Taurek imagines that we are in a position such that w...
Discussion of the “problem of numbers” in morality has focused almost exclusively on the moral signi...
BOAT: Two boats are about to sink. There are five people on boat X, and there is one person on boat ...
Suppose that each of the following four conditions obtains: 1. You can save either a greater or a le...
Questioning the ethical reasoning behind ways of attributing value to lives impacts philosophical di...
This is a book about duties to help others. When do you have to sacrifice life and limb, time and mo...
The canonical case that psychologists, philosophers, and policy analysts reflect upon in considering...
Joe Horton’s all-or-nothing problem concerns a situation in which it is morally permissible to do no...
A very short, exegetical paper about Taurek's "Should the Numbers Count?," arguing against the view ...
One major challenge in moral theory has been to account for some intuitively striking moral differen...
Have you a duty to save the greater rather than the lesser number from death when you cannot save al...
In the distribution of resources, persons must be respected, or so many philosophers contend. Unfort...
Faced with the choice between saving one person and saving two others, what should we do? It seems i...