Högre seminariet i filosofi och vetenskapsteori bjuder in till seminarium med Per Algander som talar på temat "Contractualism and the repugnant conclusion".
Abstract: This paper presents two versions of Scanlonian contractualism which have distinct consequences when applied to different-people choices: actualist contractualism and ratificationist contractualism. It is argued that the most plausible version of contractualism is ratificationist. However, this view is problematic since it implies that different-people cases where we have to choose a lesser evil are moral dilemmas. Several ways to avoid this conclusion are considered and it is argued that the most promising line is one where different people’s claims are weighed against each other. This view, however, faces the same problems as consequentialist views do in different number cases. Contractualism therefore faces the old problems in population ethics, such as the repugnant conclusion, and thus has no clear advantage over consequentialist views in this area.