Save the five: Meeting Taurek's challenge

Abstract

Six people are in trouble. We can save five of them or just the sixth. What should we do? John Taurek defends a radical view: We are not required to save the greater number. Taurek has persuaded some. But even the unpersuaded agree that Taurek poses a deep and important challenge: From where does the priority of the many derive? It seems difficult, or even impossible, to convince someone who denies the importance of the numbers… to care about the numbers. That's what this paper aims to do. It will argue that the priority of the many follows, with minimal other assumptions, from something all should accept: the modest premise that if we can improve one person's chance of survival—without affecting anyone else—we should.