Tournament: Princeton Classic | Round: 1 | Opponent: Aleena Reddy | Judge: Jacob Palmer
The standard is maximizing expected well-being.
~a~ Governments must aggregate since every policy benefits some and harms others, which also means side constraints freeze action.
~d~ Actor-specificity comes first since different agents have different ethical standings. Takes out util calc indicts since they’re empirically denied and link turns them because the alt would be no action.
Charles Larmore, ~University of Chicago~ "A Critique of Philip Pettit’s Republicanism" RE
Pettit's answer is that the basis for possible interference is not arbitrary if it leads
AND
, or the outcome will have no claim to being fair and just.
B) The problem of intervening actors. If someone cheats on their spouse and the spouse kills them in response, the cheater is not responsible for their own death. Likewise, the NC can’t garner offense from causing other actors to minimize domination.
1 – Their arbitrary power standard lacks a definition – that means it’s impossible to enforce the standard which is a takeout to its ethical desirability
2 – The standard is just an instantiation of rule util according to Pettit - Rule util must collapse to act util because we constantly adjust our rules to maximize goodness on balance, like avoiding extinction – that means that the only rule that maximizes goodness is act util
Richard Chappell, PhD, Princeton University. Libertarian vs. Utilitarian Justice, Philosophy. June 2005. JC
Libertarians hold that each person owns themselves, and others may not make use of
AND
any case. We are thus led back in the direction of utilitarianism.
Pettit 95 ~Philip Pettit (Irish Philosopher. Civic republicanism dude.) "The Virtual Reality of ‘Homo Economicus.’" The Monist Vol. 78 No. 3. July 1995.~ MK
But the focal-peripheral interpretation of the claim that people are implicitly self-
AND
which by the common values of the culture is what the situation requires.