IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/utilit/v27y2015i04p389-424_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Defence of Average Utilitarianism

Author

Listed:
  • PRESSMAN, MICHAEL

Abstract

Seemingly every theory of population ethics is confronted with unpalatable implications. While various approaches to the subject have been taken, including non-consequentialist approaches, this area has been dominated by utilitarian thought. The two main approaches to population ethics have been total utilitarianism (‘TU’) and average utilitarianism (‘AU’). According to TU, we should seek to bring about the state of affairs that maximizes the total amount of happiness. According to AU, we should seek to bring about the state of affairs that maximizes average per capita happiness. Both theories have been afflicted by seemingly strong objections, and as a result, numerous variations and hybrids have been introduced. Despite the widespread disagreement in the field, though, a near consensus has developed in rejecting AU as an absurd view. In this article, however, I will go against the grain and argue that AU is the theory of population ethics that we should endorse.

Suggested Citation

  • Pressman, Michael, 2015. "A Defence of Average Utilitarianism," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 389-424, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:27:y:2015:i:04:p:389-424_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0953820815000072/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dean Spears, 2017. "Making people happy or making happy people? Questionnaire-experimental studies of population ethics and policy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(1), pages 145-169, June.
    2. Christian Tarsney & Teruji Thomas, 2020. "Non-Additive Axiologies in Large Worlds," Papers 2010.06842, arXiv.org.
    3. Karin Enflo, 2021. "Quantity, quality, equality: introducing a new measure of social welfare," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(3), pages 665-701, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:27:y:2015:i:04:p:389-424_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/uti .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.