Reply to Spears’s ‘The Asymmetry of Population Ethics’

IF 1.2 2区哲学 Q3 ECONOMICS

Economics and Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-10-20 DOI:10.1017/s0266267122000177

Jonas H. Aaron

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Is the procreation asymmetry intuitively supported? According to a recent article in this journal, an experimental study suggests the opposite. Dean Spears (2020) claims that nearly three-quarters of participants report that there is a reason to create a person just because that person’s life would be happy. In reply, I argue that various confounding factors render the study internally invalid. More generally, I show how one might come to adopt the procreation asymmetry for the wrong reasons by misinterpreting one’s intuitions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

回复斯皮尔斯的“人口伦理的不对称性”

生殖不对称是否得到了直观的支持？根据该杂志最近的一篇文章，一项实验研究表明情况恰恰相反。Dean Spears（2020）声称，近四分之三的参与者表示，仅仅因为一个人的生活会幸福，就有理由创造一个人。作为回应，我认为各种混杂因素使该研究在内部无效。更普遍地说，我展示了一个人是如何通过误解自己的直觉，出于错误的原因而采用生育不对称的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Economics and Philosophy Multiple-

CiteScore

1.80

自引率

8.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The disciplines of economics and philosophy each possess their own special analytical methods, whose combination is powerful and fruitful. Each discipline can be enriched by the other. Economics and Philosophy aims to promote their mutual enrichment by publishing articles and book reviews in all areas linking these subjects. Topics include the methodology and epistemology of economics, the foundations of decision theory and game theory, the nature of rational choice in general, historical work on economics with a philosophical purpose, ethical issues in economics, the use of economic techniques in ethical theory, and many other subjects.