生活中最糟糕的事情

IF 0.3 N/A PHILOSOPHY

Grazer Philosophische Studien-International Journal for Analytic Philosophy Pub Date : 2020-08-20 DOI:10.1163/18756735-000108

W. Sumner

{"title":"生活中最糟糕的事情","authors":"W. Sumner","doi":"10.1163/18756735-000108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nOne important test of adequacy for a theory of welfare is completeness. To be complete a theory must cover ill-being as well as well-being. Call this the ill-being test for a theory. The author’s aim in this article is to determine how well equipped the leading theories of welfare are to pass this test. The author reaches three modest conclusions: (1) passing the test is not straightforward for any theory; (2) on the whole, subjective theories do better than objective ones; (3) within the subjective category experiential theories do better than desire theories.","PeriodicalId":43873,"journal":{"name":"Grazer Philosophische Studien-International Journal for Analytic Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18756735-000108","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Worst Things in Life\",\"authors\":\"W. Sumner\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18756735-000108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nOne important test of adequacy for a theory of welfare is completeness. To be complete a theory must cover ill-being as well as well-being. Call this the ill-being test for a theory. The author’s aim in this article is to determine how well equipped the leading theories of welfare are to pass this test. The author reaches three modest conclusions: (1) passing the test is not straightforward for any theory; (2) on the whole, subjective theories do better than objective ones; (3) within the subjective category experiential theories do better than desire theories.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43873,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Grazer Philosophische Studien-International Journal for Analytic Philosophy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18756735-000108\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Grazer Philosophische Studien-International Journal for Analytic Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18756735-000108\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Grazer Philosophische Studien-International Journal for Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18756735-000108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

摘要

福利理论充分性的一个重要检验标准是完整性。要想完整，一个理论必须涵盖健康和疾病。可以称之为对理论的恶意测试。作者在这篇文章中的目的是确定领先的福利理论在多大程度上能够通过这一测试。作者得出了三个适度的结论：（1）通过测试对任何理论来说都不是简单的；（2）总的来说，主观理论比客观理论做得更好；（3）在主观范畴内，经验论比欲望论做得更好。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The Worst Things in Life

One important test of adequacy for a theory of welfare is completeness. To be complete a theory must cover ill-being as well as well-being. Call this the ill-being test for a theory. The author’s aim in this article is to determine how well equipped the leading theories of welfare are to pass this test. The author reaches three modest conclusions: (1) passing the test is not straightforward for any theory; (2) on the whole, subjective theories do better than objective ones; (3) within the subjective category experiential theories do better than desire theories.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Grazer Philosophische Studien-International Journal for Analytic Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量